“A House of Many Rooms:” Different Approaches of Two Translators of Flora Tristan’s Pérégrinations d’une paria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper performs a comparative analysis of two translations of Flora Tristan’s travelogue to Peru, Pérégrinations d’une paria (1838), namely Jean Hawkes’ English translation, Peregrinations of a Pariah and Emilia Romero’s Spanish version, Peregrinaciones de una paria. This analysis reveals that the two translators chose different approaches to their task, thus inhabiting two different rooms in the house of translation (Neubert and Shreve 1994). Special emphasis is placed on their representations of slavery and the concept of women as slaves in marriage. This project relies on the translation theories and practice described in Kadish and Massadier-Kenney’s edited volume, Translating Slavery, which presents translation from a humanistic, critical, and ideological point of view. The translators writing in this volume incorporate social issues such as race and gender, providing different perspectives on the original text. This project uses one of their approaches: that is, a contrastive and comparative method, examining the differences between the original and the translated texts, especially looking at the interventions of the translators.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".