MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285600551 · doi:10.5325/shaw.42.1.0033

“Un ‘Pygmalion’ québécois: une victoire”: Éloi de Grandmont’s Translation of Bernard Shaw’s <i>Pygmalion</i>

2022· article· en· W4285600551 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aileen R. Ruane

Bibliographic record

VenueShaw · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)SociologyArtHumanitiesArt historyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Éloi de Grandmont’s 1968 translation of Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion, staged by Théâtre du Nouveau Monde in their 1968–69 season, featured dialogue in standard French as well as joual, paralleling Shaw’s dichotomy between Cockney and Standard English from the 1941 source text, and also reterritorialized London’s environs to Montreal. Grandmont’s translation of Pygmalion highlights translation as creative and productive, rather than derivative and secondary, work because it reconstructs and reterritorializes, rather than mimics, a Shavian Montreal. Adapting the original play demonstrates how language influences and constructs identity through the layering of various other linguistic and cultural constructions. This article therefore demonstrates the impact of Grandmont’s proactive translation of Shaw’s Pygmalion, serving to inspire later sociopolitically proactive translations in Quebec, and analyzes how the translator foregrounds Québécois identity during the formative period of La Révolution Tranquille.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueShawSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207