A Study on the Metaphor Translation Strategies in “Xi Jinping: The Governance of China”(Volume IV) from the Perspective of Conceptual Metaphor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the core priority of political discourse translation, metaphor translation in “Xi Jinping: The Governance of China” (Volume IV) undoubtedly sets a paradigm, showcasing the unique role of metaphors in political communication. Drawing upon Lakoff’s theory, this study categorizes the metaphors in the book into structural, ontological, and orientational types, and identifies 16 metaphorical expressions with the aid of the Metaphor Identification Procedure(MIP) developed by the Pragglejaz Group. By combining qualitative and quantitative analyses, it employs Charteris-Black’s “Source Domain Resonance Value” theory to quantify the proportion of metaphorical keywords and their resonance values. Through case studies, this research delves into the translation strategies and techniques employed for metaphors in various mapping contexts, aiming to provide strategic guidance for practitioners in the field of political discourse translation. It seeks to enhance the professionalism and international communicative power of China’s political metaphor translation, thereby showcasing the unique charm and value of China’s voice in the global context.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".