MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592859211 · doi:10.5539/ells.v7n1p126

On Obstacles of Metaphor Translation from Perspective of Culture

2017· article· en· W2592859211 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ke-yu He

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaphorPerspective (graphical)Emphasis (telecommunications)LinguisticsTranslation (biology)Event (particle physics)Field (mathematics)Computer scienceTranslation studiesTask (project management)Cognitive scienceSociologyEpistemologyPsychologyArtificial intelligencePhilosophyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Translating is a complex and fascinating task, as Richards (1965) once claimed that translating is probably the most complex type of event in the history of the cosmos. In the development of modern translation theories, there is a tendency that culture is introduced into this field. Translating becomes more complex for it has been defined as a cross-cultural communication event, and it involves not only two languages but also two cultures. This shift from emphasis on linguistic transfer towards emphasis on cultural transfer naturally exists in the translation of metaphor. Metaphor is not only an important figure of speech, but also a cognitive means of human mind. The people with different means of thinking have different cultures. The metaphorical language used by people must be fully saturated with culture peculiar to it. So because of the influence of cultural factor, the translation of metaphors becomes the most important particular problem. The paper discusses the reasons for the difficulties of metaphor translation, and summarizes several obstacles of it.

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)0.000
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 score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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