Aspects et enjeux de la représentation culturelle dans la traduction du roman arabe postcolonial en français et en anglais
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The translation of the postcolonial Arabic novel into English and French is an interesting case in which cultural representation can be examined in a way to shed light on its diverse aspects and repercussions as well as explore the role of the translators, among other agents, in negotiating the cultural distance between Arab novelists and the target audience, namely the Western one. This thesis looks closely at the notions of assimilation and non assimilation. It aims at reviewing their function, effect and axiological value as well as reconsidering some common assumptions about translation and its representational dimension. A historicist and more inclusive approach is adopted so as to study the novels and (re)translations selected, to highlight the complexity of literary translation and to further explore the ways in which cultural traits, especially the situation of women, are rendered in the translated versions.Moreover, this study offers a brief overview of the translation of Arabic literature into French and English from 1968 to 2004. It illustrates several aspects of the latter, including economic, (geo)political, literary and cultural factors. In addition, it presents an evaluation of relevant studies and analyses conducted on the translation of Arabic literature into these languages. An attempt is made to promote a different vision of this translation, one that is more favourable to the creation of diversified tastes for Arabic literary works and to greater convergence of the worldviews of Arab and Western cultures at a time when mutual understanding is crucial and the debate on the relations between Self and Other (the Arab and/or the Muslim) has proven increasingly relevant since the beginning of the third millennium. The ethics of the translation from Arabic into English and French is discussed not only in terms of the preservation or omission of cultural alterity, the effects of which are not necessarily predictable, but also according to the undeniable aesthetic issues raised by this activity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".