Translation and Ideology: A Study of Lin Zexu’s Translation Activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes a brief study of Lin Zexu’s translation activities from the perspective of ideology. Lin was not a translator himself, but an initiator and patron of translations. He organised translation activities with sources from foreign newspapers and books to help his anti-opium campaign and resistance to British invasion. Translations from foreign sources were not welcomed by the Qing government and translators were even regarded as traitors. Lin, however, had a contrasting attitude towards translation. To Lin, translation was a way to learn about the outside world and to learn from it. The Qing government, on the other hand, held the view that translations of foreign documents were of little use. The difference between Lin’s view and that of the Qing court can be seen as an ideological divergence between Lin and the government he served. This culminated in the expulsion of Lin from the government, his exile and the termination of his translation activities. This shows how a state instigated ideological position can predominate over an oppositional ideology – in this case to the detriment of the state.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".