PECULIARITIES OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE ORIGINAL AND TRANSLATION OF E.SETON-THOMPSON’S SHORT STORY ‘THE ВIOGRAPHY OF A GRIZZLY’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of Ernest Seton-Thompson as a writer who started the genre of animal short-story and his contribution into the national Canadian literature are discussed in the article. Peculiar features of animal-personages from his short-stories which are close to people were singled out. The peculiarities of the literary translation which aim is to reflect ideas, feelings transforming the author’s images with the help of another language material, the main features that make it different from a classical one were stated. Contemporary scholars who scrutinize this aspect in modern translation studies were found out. The notion of adequacy in the process of a literary text translation, the necessity and strive of the translator to reflect the sense, embodied in artistic images, to preserve genre and style and structural-compositional peculiarities of the original text in the context of comparative analysis of the literary text were noted. The differences between the original text of E.Seton-Thompson’s short-story “The Biography of a Grizzly” and its translation by М.Chukovsky were analyzed in the given article. The translation can be called adequate as some change of content and form of the original text by means of the target language did not impact into general perception of the short-story in its translation. The translator conveys the author’s ideas provoking reader‘s reaction to the story. М.Chukovsky preserved its content, the system of images and the author’s style and plot identity of the original text. Peculiarities of his translation, main structural-grammar and lexical transformations used in the translation were marked. Among the most frequently used transformation techniques actual division of the sentence, grammar changes, change of the sentence parts, concretization, generalization, addition, omission and antonymic translation are noted.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".