The shifting reception of Jean-Paul Sartre in the People's Republic of China during the Cold War: A case study of the journal <i>Shijie Wenxue</i> (1953-1991)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigates the reception of French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) during the Cold War by focusing on the journal Shijie Wenxue , which was the only journal to publish translations under the PRC’s Communist regime until 1978. The article analyses the selection and de-selection of Sartre’s works for translation and publication in this journal, the triangulated translation of Sartre’s play La Putain respectueuse [The Respectful Prostitute] and the paratextual framing of Sartre and his works. This research adopts Lefevere’s (1992) theory of ideology and patronage, critical discourse analysis (CDA) and Baker’s (2016) narrative theory as theoretical frameworks. The researchers found ideology and politics influenced the reception of Sartre’s works in the PRC. We did not detect any translations or introductory articles which ran counter to the meta-narratives of the PRC during the Cold War. Instead, it was found that the actors (translators and editors) used a reframing strategy that involved adding an introductory text to the Chinese translations and further manipulating the texts, such as changing the ending of the stories, in order to enhance certain narratives while foreclosing others. The researchers also found that the public narratives on Sartre in the PRC underwent several shifts during this period.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".