Analyzing, transmitting, and editing an Anatolian tale: A literary translation project as process
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is based on a literary translation project conducted within the framework of a four-year translation and interpretation undergraduate program. A literary translation course is offered in the sixth term of the program as part of the literature module. In the first stage of the course, students read and analyze literary works using operations of analysis and compare them with their translations to determine meaning transformations of any type. This process is expected to enable students to develop an awareness of the indispensability of textual analysis for translation and the possibility of different kinds of meaning transformations. With this dual awareness, students as prospective translators are expected to be able to better understand and transfer the signs that constitute a literary work and avoid unintended meaning transformations. In the second stage, students choose a short story to translate by applying the knowledge and skills they acquired in the first stage. After this process, they edit the translated text. At the end of the semester, to share their translation with their class, students prepare a presentation on their analysis of the source text as well as the translation and editing processes, emphasizing the notable outcomes of the analysis and related decisions made to transfer distinctive signs. In this study, the translation of İki Peri Kızı (The Fairy Sisters) by Tahsin Yücel is aimed at providing an example for literary translation projects that may be conducted in similar contexts.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it