Traduire la littérature romanesque canadienne-française du xixe siècle : regard sur la production et la réception des versions anglaises
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, nous nous pencherons sur la production et la réception dans l’Amérique du Nord anglophone des traductions anglaises des romans canadiens-français publiés auxixe siècle. Les romans à l’étude étaientL’Influence d’un livre(1837),Les Anciens Canadiens(1863),Angéline de Montbrun(1884) etÀ l’oeuvre et à l’épreuve(1891). Dans un premier temps, nous examinons donc les concepts théoriques de distribution, de diffusion, de réception et de réception critique. Puis, dans un deuxième temps, nous présenterons brièvement les résultats de nos recherches en analysant les parcours de réceptions des traductions anglophones des romans de notre corpus. Nous démontrerons que certaines oeuvres ont profité d’une réception enviable – et sont toujours reconnues de nos jours – alors que d’autres sont presque passées inaperçues.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".