MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W657412567

Translation Strategies for Culture-specific Items in the Lithuanian Versions of Four British and Canadian Novels for Young People

2011· dissertation· en· W657412567 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Asta Venskūnienė, Milda Danytė, Ingrida Eglė Žindžiuvienė

Bibliographic record

VenueLaba (Lietuvos akademinių bibliotekų direktorių asociacija) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLithuanianTranslation (biology)HistoryLinguisticsMedia studiesLiteratureSociologyArtPhilosophyBiologyGenetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis analyses the translation strategies for culture-specific items (CSIs) in the translations by four different Lithuanian translators of four British and Canadian novels for young people, "Alone at Ninety Foot" (2001) by Katherine Holubitsky, "Hit and Run" (2003) by Norah McClintock, "Double Act" (1996) by Jacqueline Wilson and "The Borrowers" (1952) by Mary Norton. All these novels have a great variety of culture-specific items, often reflecting the lives of children and adolescents and issues that are important to them. The analysis of translation of culture-specific items is based on the strategies suggested by Eirlys E. Davies, while the categories of culture-specific items that are chosen for deeper discussion are those of a higher importance for the characters or themes of the novel. Statistical analysis of the strategies helps to form a clearer picture of the strategic choices preferred by each of the four Lithuanian translators.\nThe present work is divided into five sections and has two appendices. Section One introduces the purpose of the work and provides some information about the object of analysis: the translation of cultural references in four British and Canadian novels for young people. Section Two explains the terminology used for the analysis of the translation of culture-specific items. Section Three is divided into eight sub-sections: 3.1, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.7 discuss the importance of some categories of culture-specific items in each novel, while... [to full text]

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaba (Lietuvos akademinių bibliotekų direktorių asociacija)Same topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207