MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3049399255 · doi:10.1093/fs/knaa138

<i> Histoire des traductions en langue française, <scp>xx</scp> <sup>e</sup> siècle: 1914–2000 </i> . Sous la direction de <scp>Bernard Banoun</scp> , <scp>Isabelle Poulin</scp> et <scp>Yves Chevrel</scp> <i> Histoire des traductions en langue française, <scp>xx</scp> <sup>e</sup> siècle: 1914–2000 </i> . Sous la direction de BanounBernard, PoulinIsabelle et ChevrelYves. Paris: Verdier, 2019. 1920 pp., ill.

2020· article· fr· W3049399255 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrench Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Linguistics and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipNarrativeHistoryPeriod (music)HumanitiesFifteenthArt historyClassicsArtLiteraturePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the fourth volume of the Histoire des traductions en langue française (HTLF). The first, covering the nineteenth century, was published in 2012; further volumes covering the fifteenth to eighteenth centuries followed in 2014 and 2016. Altogether the project represents an astounding labour of scholarship and international collaboration, completed over a relatively short time period. The HTLF sets itself the ambitious goal of observing the role played by translations in all areas of intellectual enquiry. Around 40 per cent of the volume under review is devoted to literary translation, and a further 40 per cent is shared between other areas, such as opera, cinema, religion, philosophy, history, anthropology, and the sciences. The remainder of the volume is taken up with contextualizing essays by leading translation theorists, and includes a history of traductologie, a field of research which — like translation studies in the UK — has come into its own since the 1970s. These rough percentages give an indication of the balance and scope of the volume, and the range of readers for whom it will no doubt become a vital resource. Far from being an enumeration of translated publications, the HTLF is a series of carefully constructed historical narratives, based on a critical approach to primary sources, and alert to the silences and biases within those narratives. In the chapter on the sciences, for example, the authors sketch out broad trajectories of translation activity against the backdrop of changing trends in language use in scientific publications, but note that any account that is based on written documents and bibliographic research overlooks the significance of what they term ‘invisible’ translation activity. By this they mean translations which circulate in unpublished form, or as annexes to original works, or, towards the end of the century, via simultaneous interpretation at major international conferences. Throughout the volume, there is a concern to shine a light on translators, ‘trop longtemps invisible’ (p. 7). Thus one of the contextualizing chapters is devoted to the translation profession and translator education; there is an index of translators as well as an index of authors; feature boxes offer biographical accounts of individual translators such as Vladimir Nabokov (pp. 815–16); names of translators are systematically included in the historical accounts, and are supplemented on occasion with further details about their other publications or activities. Considerable attention is also given to the crucial role played by patrons and editors in determining translation selection. Geographically, the focus of the volume is on the major francophone spaces of the West — France, Canada, Belgium, Switzerland. Temporally, the volume ends, as its title indicates, in the year 2000; only one of the chapters (on feminism and gender studies) extends in-depth discussion into the early decades of the twenty-first century. From the perspective of today’s technology-imbued world, there is already a sense on reading this ‘final’ HTLF volume (p. 7) that a history of the first decades of the twenty-first century needs to follow not long behind.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.008
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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