La « Loi 101 » et la langue du théâtre québécois : implications pour la traduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ensuring unilingual French in Quebec, “Bill 101” also makes an impact on the culture and theatre therein. The use of the sociolect of the Montreal working class (commonly called “joual”) thus ceases to be the flagship issue of any artistic or literature production of the Province. However, the language of plays created after the “Les Belles-Soeurs” of Michel Tremblay does not lose its identification value, demonstrated by the presence of specific elements of the Quebec French language. Nevertheless, these Quebecisms constitute the main difficulty when translating Quebec plays into foreign languages and for their adaptation into other francophone theaters. Starting from a sociolinguistic perspective, the purpose of this contribution is to improve the understanding of the challenge raised when translating/adapting texts written in “joual”. Selected texts include the above mentioned work and later plays – to take only the most representative examples – “Albertine en cinq tems” of the same author, and “Les Muses orphelines” by Michel Marc Bouchard. This author analyzes selected French and Spanish-speaking versions of these texts with the aim to compare and contrast differences between the translations and the Quebecian originals.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".