MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392116122 · doi:10.1017/9789048542963.001

Introduction: ‘Transformance’: Renaissance Women's Translation and the Performance of Gift Exchange

2023· other· en· W4392116122 on OpenAlexaff
Kirsten Inglis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRenaissance and Early Modern Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe RenaissanceTranslation (biology)ArtArt historyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

: This introduction situates the translational practice of early modern women writers within its historical and political context and argues for the essential connection between translation and gift culture in early modern England. The introduction offers a brief history of translation theory and practice in the period by examining medieval and Renaissance paratexts such as dedications and prefaces. The introduction considers these in connection with modern theories of translation and argues for seeing the early modern translations studied in the book as participating in a translational ethics rooted in the idea of ‘transformance’. Translation as performance and resistance is effected through the patronage networks and gifting practices of early modern England. Keywords : gifting; patronage; Renaissance; translation; women's writing The feminist translator immodestly flaunts her signature in italics, in footnotes – even in a preface – Barbara Godard Barbara Godard describes in the epigraph above a translational practice completely at odds with the model of translation prevalent from the end of the seventeenth century and still largely privileged today, in which the success of a translation is judged by the ‘invisibility’ of its translator and its illusion of transparent transfer of meaning from one language to another. Translators and theorists have strenuously challenged this model in recent years, with Lawrence Venuti the most ‘visible’ of these commentators. Transparency, the absence of linguistic or stylistic peculiarities, effectively ‘conceals the numerous conditions under which the translation is made, starting with the translator's crucial intervention’. Venuti and others find such transparency ethically problematic, as it silently colonizes the source language of a text and elides both the translator's creative work and her cultural biases. The epigraph from Godard above emphasizes the way in which the twentieth-century feminist translator challenges the ideal of transparency, working to emerge from the shadow of her source text and make herself visible in the materials and paratexts of her book. For Godard, feminist discourse is translation as it ‘set[s] out to “destroy the discursive mechanism” by assuming the feminine role deliberately, in an act of “mimicry,” which is to convert a form of subordination into an affirmation and to challenge an order resting on sexual indifference’.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

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 studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRenaissance and Early Modern StudiesFrench-language works237,207