La Septante en tant que lieu de contact linguistique : quelques réflexions concernant la production et l’interprétation de traductions anciennes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to recent research in translation studies and contact linguistics, written translation constitutes a form of language contact analogous to spoken bilingualism. In a multilingual society, both situations often draw on the same types of constraints and cognitive processes. Consequently, translations such as those found in the Septuagint represent a site of language contact in which the influence of one language on another can rarely be avoided. Contact linguistics can therefore shed light on certain aspects of the debate concerning the influence of Hebrew on the Greek of the Septuagint. To this end, this study examines: 1) the types of linguistic influence typically found in bilingual productions and their parallels in the Septuagint; 2) the consequences of this influence on questions of linguistic register and literary genre; and, 3) the interpretation of linguistic innovations produced under the influence of the source language. In this context, questions arise as to how these linguistic innovations would have been understood, and by whom, as well as the problem of translating the Greek text into modern languages: should these expressions be rendered according to the conventional meaning of each of their Greek components, or according to the (new?) meaning they may acquire in context? That some ancient authors document such interpretive challenges in their reading of the Septuagint—challenges that are sometimes mitigated when these readers are proficient in a Semitic language—suggests that bilingualism is not only a factor in the production of these texts, but also in their interpretation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".