MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7042967414

Questions of status: Macbeth in Quebecois and Scots

2002· article· en· W7042967414 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueStrathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScotsArgument (complex analysis)HistoricismTarget culturePeriod (music)Queen (butterfly)Linguistic analysisHallucinating
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.194 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde)Same topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207