MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161809823 · doi:10.82308/55513

L’adaptation intralinguistique dans la littérature d’enfance et de jeunesse : l’exemple du Journal d’Aurélie Laflamme

2022· dissertation· fr· W7161809823 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daphné Cusson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic and Sociocultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint (geometry)Context (archaeology)Domain (mathematical analysis)Order (exchange)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au Québec, la série de romans Le journal d’Aurélie Laflamme (2006 à 2018) d’India Desjardins, destinée à un public composé majoritairement d’adolescentes, a connu un immense succès avant de traverser l’Atlantique et d’être adaptée pour le lectorat français au courant de la décennie 2010. À travers une lecture comparative des éditions québécoises et françaises, ce mémoire observe les changements, tant culturels que linguistiques, apportés au texte source afin de rendre compte du rapport de force entre les deux espaces linguistiques francophones. Cette enquête se propose d’approfondir la question du point de vue inédit de l’adaptation intralinguistique (Québec-France) en prenant pour cadre d’étude les pratiques traduisantes en littérature d’enfance et de jeunesse. En établissant un parallèle entre « l’épreuve de l’étranger » et la diversité des langues et cultures au sein de l’espace francophone, le présent travail de recherche permet de mettre en lumière les contraintes et effets de la réécriture culturelle et linguistique du Journal d’Aurélie Laflamme

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.010
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLinguistic and Sociocultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207