MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586203995 · doi:10.5539/ells.v7n1p51

Translating Culture-specific Elements in Names in Hong Lou Meng: A Comparison of The Story of the Stone and The Dream of Red Mansion

2017· article· en· W2586203995 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ting Wang, Jiafeng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSouthwest University for NationalitiesFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesSouthwest University
KeywordsTransliterationCharacter (mathematics)AnnotationLiteral translationCompensation (psychology)SpellingHierarchyLinguisticsComputer scienceLine (geometry)Natural language processingZero (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceSource textPsychologyMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The names of the characters in Hong Lou Meng, crafted to indicate both the development of the storyline and the characteristics of the characters, contain abundant culture-specific elements, which make them difficult to render into English. On the basis of a systematic study on the original work and its two unabridged translations of Hong Lou Meng, the culture-specific elements in the original names are categorized into the following three: Chinese naming, Chinese family hierarchy and Chinese Character. Three strategies on compensation for the lost culture-specific elements are found to be employed at different levels in the two translations, including on-line compensation, off-line compensation and zero compensation. The strategy of on-line compensation involves semantic translation plus transliteration and annotation in text. Off-line compensation includes note of Chinese spelling, annotation out of text, interpretation of characters’ names in introduction, note ofcharacters’ names in appendix, introduction of characters in appendix and dendrogram of genealogy; Zero compensation includes transliteration, omission, transfer, substitution and literal translation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207