Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Accessing the Aesthetic Potential of Poetry Via Translations Cover

Accessing the Aesthetic Potential of Poetry Via Translations

Scientific Study of Literature
Volume 15 (2026): Issue 1
By: ,  ,   and    
Open Access
|Jul 2026
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Table 1

He for basic emotional (above) and aesthetic associations (below) for the target word weary.

EMOTIONVALUE
anger0.02
disgust0.04
fear0.13
joy0.13
sadness0.18*
surprise–0.05
EMOTIONVALUE
sick0.45*
sickness0.26
happy0.23
ache0.23
misery0.21
Table 2

Linewise Pearson correlation between AAP values of the original of Shakespeare’s Sonnet 27 and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Benediktov (1884)Russian0.63
Google Translate (2025d)Russian0.44
Google Translate (2025c)German0.38
Gildemeister (1876)German0.37
Nabokov (1930)Russian0.34
Tieck (1992)German0.34
Bodenstedt (1866)German0.27
Kaljavina (2015)Russian0.25
Kraus (1964)German0.01
Ilʹin (1902)Russian–0.02
George (2008)German–0.04
Stepanov (1999)Russian–0.17
Table 3

Linewise Pearson correlation between AAP values of the original of Pushkin’s Ja vas ljubil and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Rainbow (2023)English0.86
Shine (2020)English0.85
Wilke (2020)German0.81
Google Translate (2025a)English0.78
Kust (2021)German0.75
Google Translate (2025b)German0.74
Fiedler (1907)German0.74
Kallsen (2022)English0.69
Sedova (2022)English0.59
Jahnke (2019)German0.53
Avrutin (2023)German0.51
Kushanov (2022)English0.49
Table 4

Linewise Pearson correlation between PosNeg Quotient values of the original of Shakespeare’s Sonnet 27 and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Bodenstedt (1866)German0.45
Google Translate (2025c)German0.34
Gildemeister (1876)German0.31
Nabokov (1930)Russian0.29
Kraus (1964)German0.29
Ilʹin (1902)Russian0.28
Tieck (1992)German0.26
Benediktov (1884)Russian0.19
Google Translate (2025d)Russian0.17
George (2008)German–0.19
Kaljavina (2015)Russian–0.29
Stepanov (1999)Russian–0.34
Table 5

Linewise Pearson correlation between PosNeg Quotient values of the original of Pushkin’s Ja vas ljubil and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
RainEnglish0.87
Shine (2020)English0.79
Sedova (2022)English0.47
Wilke (2020)German0.32
Kust (2021)German0.26
Google Translate (2025a)English0.13
Jahnke (2019)German0.12
Fiedler (1907)German–0.11
Avrutin (2023)German–0.21
Kallsen (2022)English–0.23
Google Translate (2025b)German–0.24
Kushanov (2022)English–0.28
Table 6

Linewise Pearson correlation between He values of the original of Shakespeare’s Sonnet 27 and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Google Translate (2025d)Russian0.38
Bodenstedt (1866)German0.30
Gildemeister (1876)German0.19
Benediktov (1884)Russian0.12
Kraus (1964)German0.04
Kaljavina (2015)Russian0.00
George (2008)German–0.06
Nabokov (1930)Russian–0.07
Ilʹin (1902)Russian–0.07
Tieck (1992)German–0.08
Stepanov (1999)Russian–0.26
Google Translate (2025c)German–0.42
Table 7

Linewise Pearson correlation between He values of the original of Pushkin’s Ja vas ljubil and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Kust (2021)German0.36
Kallsen (2022)English0.35
Google Translate (2025a)English0.27
Shine (2020)English0.23
Fiedler (1907)German0.15
Avrutin (2023)German–0.01
Rainbow (2023)English–0.05
Jahnke (2019)German–0.09
Wilke (2020)German–0.14
Sedova (2022)English–0.16
Google Translate (2025b)German–0.17
Kushanov (2022)English–0.28
Table 8

Linewise Pearson correlation between Eigensimilarity values of the original of Shakespeare’s Sonnet 27 and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Google Translate (2025c)German0.62
Google Translate (2025d)Russian0.41
Benediktov (1884)Russian0.34
Nabokov (1930)Russian0.31
Kaljavina (2015)Russian0.21
Stepanov (1999)Russian0.10
Bodenstedt (1866)German0.08
Kraus (1964)German0.00
Tieck (1992)German–0.03
Gildemeister (1876)German–0.16
Ilʹin (1902)Russian–0.24
George (2008)German–0.24
Table 9

Linewise Pearson correlation between Eigensimilarity values of the original of Pushkin’s Ja vas ljubil and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Fiedler (1907)German0.60
Rainbow (2023)English0.50
Shine (2020)English0.47
Google Translate (2025a)English0.44
Kushanov (2022)English0.43
Jahnke (2019)German0.20
Wilke (2020)German0.18
Sedova (2022)English0.15
Kust (2021)German–0.09
Kallsen (2022)English–0.12
Avrutin (2023)German–0.24
Google Translate (2025b)German–0.26
Table 10

Linewise Pearson correlation between Hpos values of the original of Shakespeare’s Sonnet 27 and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Google Translate (2025d)Russian0.76
Gildemeister (1876)German0.74
Tieck (1992)German0.66
Stepanov (1999)Russian0.60
George (2008)German0.58
Google Translate (2025c)German0.53
Kaljavina (2015)Russian0.49
Kraus (1964)German0.41
Ilʹin (1902)Russian0.25
Bodenstedt (1866)German0.18
Benediktov (1884)Russian0.09
Nabokov (1930)Russian–0.11
Table 11

Linewise Pearson correlation between Hpos values of the original of Pushkin’s Ja vas ljubil and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Google Translate (2025a)English0.89
Jahnke (2019)German0.77
Kallsen (2022)English0.77
Google Translate (2025b)German0.74
Kust (2021)German0.68
Wilke (2020)German0.66
Avrutin (2023)German0.27
Sedova (2022)English0.16
Shine (2020)English–0.05
Kushanov (2022)English–0.14
Rainbow (2023)English–0.36
Fiedler (1907)German–0.44
Table 12

Linewise Pearson correlation between Proportion of Nouns values of the original of Shakespeare’s Sonnet 27 and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Google Translate (2025d)Russian0.76
Gildemeister (1876)German0.74
Tieck (1992)German0.66
Stepanov (1999)Russian0.60
George (2008)German0.58
Google Translate (2025c)German0.53
Kaljavina (2015)Russian0.49
Kraus (1964)German0.41
Ilʹin (1902)Russian0.25
Bodenstedt (1866)German0.18
Benediktov (1884)Russian0.09
Nabokov (1930)Russian–0.11
Table 13

Linewise Pearson correlation between Proportion of Nouns values of the original of Pushkin’s Ja vas ljubil and its translations.

TRANSLATIONLANGUAGECORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Avrutin (2023)German1.00
Google Translate (2025a)English0.89
Rainbow (2023)English0.80
Kust (2021)German0.79
Sedova (2022)English0.75
Jahnke (2019)German0.64
Wilke (2020)German0.64
Google Translate (2025b)German0.57
Shine (2020)English0.50
Kallsen (2022)English0.42
Fiedler (1907)German0.15
Kushanov (2022)English–0.18
Table 14

Rank order of correlations with the six features for the 12 translations of Shakespeare’s Sonnet 27.

TITLEAAPpnqHeHposEIGENSIMNOUNSmean tot
Shakespeare_orig1111111
Google Translate (2025d)_ru0.4430.1730.3830.4110.4110.7610.499
Tieck (1992)_de0.3420.264–0.080.309–0.030.6560.294
George (2008)_de–0.04–0.19–0.060.722–0.240.5830.249
Google Translate (2025c)_de0.380.336–0.42–0.070.6170.5310.219
Nabokov (1930)_ru0.3440.293–0.070.2350.312–0.110.206
Gildemeister (1876)_de0.3680.3080.189–0.16–0.160.7410.188
Kaljavina (2015)_ru0.249–0.29–4e-30.1760.2060.4910.168
Benediktov (1884)_ru0.6280.1870.12–0.230.3410.0880.152
Bodenstedt (1866)_ru0.2690.4530.301–0.260.0780.1760.128
Ilʹin (1902)_ru–0.020.28–0.070.229–0.240.250.112
Kraus (1964)_de0.0090.2860.037–0.23e-40.410.057
Stepanov (1999)_ru–0.17–0.34–0.26–0.010.1010.6–0.02
Table 15

Rank order of correlations with the six features for the 12 translations of Pushkin’s Ja vas ljubil.

TITLEAAPpnqHeHposEIGENSIMNOUNSmean tot
Pushkin_orig1111111
Google Translate (2025a)_en0.780.130.270.900.440.900.57
Shine (2020)_en0.850.790.23–0.10.470.50.46
Kust (2021)_de0.750.260.360.68–0.10.790.46
Rainbow (2023)_en0.860.87–0.1–0.40.50.80.44
Wilke (2020)_de0.810.32–0.10.660.180.640.41
Jahnke (2019)_de0.530.12–0.10.770.20.640.36
Sedova (2022)_en0.590.47–0.20.160.150.750.33
Kallsen (2022)_en0.69–0.20.350.77–0.10.420.31
Google Translate (2025b)_de0.74–0.2–0.20.74–0.30.570.23
Avrutin (2023)_de0.51–0.2–0.0080.27–0.210.22
Fiedler (1907)_de0.74–0.10.15–0.40.60.150.18
Kushanov (2022)_en0.49–0.3–0.3–0.10.43–0.20.005
Table 16

Predictive Accuracy of the six feature model in predicting the poem title for each line of both poems.

MEASUREVALUE
Generalized R20.99
Entropy R20.87
Missclassification Rate0.10
Table 17

Importance of each feature for predicting the title of Sonnet 27 and Ja vas ljubil, pooled.

FEATURETOTAL EFFECT
Eigensimilarity0.70
He0.57
Proportion of Nouns0.53
PosNeg Quotient0.52
AAP mean0.48
Hpos0.46
Table 18

Effects of each feature for predicting Sonnet 27 and Ja vas ljubil.

FEATURESONNET 27JA vas ljubil
MAIN EFFECTTOTAL EFFECTMAIN EFFECTTOTAL EFFECT
Eigensimilarity0.0720.6340.0820.774
Proportion of Nouns0.0380.5650.0510.701
PosNeg Quotient0.0330.5460.0200.458
AAP mean0.0290.4890.0160.313
He0.0190.4330.0160.425
Hpos0.0190.3930.0100.266
DOI: https://doi.org/10.61645/ssol.225 | Journal eISSN: 2210-4380
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 118 - 137
Submitted on: Feb 28, 2026
Accepted on: Jun 5, 2026
Published on: Jul 30, 2026
Published by: International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
diversity of poetic traditions,
poetry translation,
transfer of aesthetic and emotional potential,
computational predictive modeling,
middle reading

© 2026 Barbara Sonnenhauser, Martina Rybová, Paul Widmer, Arthur M. Jacobs, published by International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 15 (2026): Issue 1
Previous article
Next article