Bibliographic record
Abstract
Writing the translation history of a bilingual country such as Canada is a monumental task. To make the enterprise manageable, it is necessary to narrow the approach and corpus. Adopting a psycho-sociological approach (Buzelin 2005; Meylaerts 2008; Wolf 2006), this study focuses on four official translators, members of the French-Canadian literary elite from 1837 to 1927 — François-Xavier Garneau, Joseph August Genand, Benjamin Sulte, Jules Tremblay — who have “[gone] down in history” (Seruya 2016: 18) as agents of minority culture preservation through their activist translation and writing work. In keeping with the approach, four of Lieven D’hulst’s (2001: 25-30) parameters (the translator’s biography, what has been translated, why and when, and the effect of translations and writings on society) have been mobilized to produce this contribution to translation history. The four translators were known to one another through their readings and networks, thereby creating a tight-knit literary and translation community, or a “collective subject” with agency (Milton et al. 2001: 279). Their marked interest in history was an important component of their shared purpose of actively contributing to the survival of their dominated minority nation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".