Długo wyczekiwany podręcznik przekładu prawniczego: recenzja książki "Przekład prawny i sądowy" Anny Jopek-Bosiackiej
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neglected for years by researchers, legal translation has recently observed a revival within Translation Studies all over the world.It is closely connected with the intensive development of research on specialised (LSP) translation and the growth of translatortraining institutions, fuelled by the increased demand on the translation market related to globalisation and the European Union.In the last decade three notable books, i.e.Ńarčević (1997), Alcaraz and Hughes (2002) and Cao (2007), were published; however, none of them is well-suited for training Polish legal translators.Ńarčević is theoretically oriented and focuses mainly on translation of legislation in multilingual countries (e.g.Canada) while practically-oriented Alcaraz & Hughes and Cao do not use Slavonic languages as their point of reference.Likewise, the Polish publication by Kierzkowska (2002) is not intended to be a textbook.Przekład.Mity i Rzeczywistość
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".