Questions of status: Macbeth in Quebecois and Scots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article compares two translations of Macbeth: one into Quebecois by Michel Garneau, and the other into Lowland Scots by R. L. C. Lorimer. Recent analysis of these outstanding examples of minority translation practice has tended to overlook the critical after-life that has contributed to the classic status of the Scottish play. The article asks whether this matters, and uses insights first developed by New Historicist critics to revise and nuance Annie Brisset's powerful critique of the ethnocentrism of the Garneau translation, suggesting that the banished figure of the 'foreign' in fact returns through the material signs of its erasure. R. L. C. Lorimer's 'restoration' of the figure of Mary, Queen of Scots, to the royal line hallucinated by Macbeth works in a similar way. This gives rise to the argument that historicizing vernaculars, provided they are used in an ironic, self-conscious manner by translators, can create dramatic texts that speak to and about the complex cultural and linguistic histories and realities of aspiring nation states and the central role played by translation in this context. Such translations further complicate Venuti's distinction between foreignizing and domesticating translation strategies. 46 References. Adapted from the source document
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 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".