This article aims to analyze the fact that the technology of identifying counterfeits in traditional Chinese textual criticism is actually related to the construction of author identity and the representation of author concepts, especially the mature technology of identifying counterfeits formed in the early Qing Dynasty. It not only examines the credibility of literature, but also involves issues such as text production, author identity, meaning evolution, and material stability.

Traditional textual research often regards the identification of counterfeits as a technical examination of false events, false statements, and false books, while ignoring the supporting concepts behind the technology, namely the inherent interdependence between the sacredness of classical texts and author identity. In some contexts, the issue of confirming the authenticity of classical texts overlaps to a high extent with the confirmation of author identity. By focusing on the analysis and discussion of Yan Ruoqu (1636-1704), Hu Wei (1633-1714), Yao Jiheng (1647-1715) and other textual criticism scholars in the early Qing Dynasty, this study aims to reveal the differences in the number, titles, wording, and materials used between different versions of the Book of Documents, the Book of Changes, and the Preface to Mao Shi, as well as the differences in style, examples, and language styles of different classical texts compared to other texts of the same period. The study aims to reveal the behavior of verifying the authenticity of textual criticism in classical studies, as well as the relatively mature anti-counterfeiting techniques developed in the early Qing Dynasty. In fact, it aims to confirm the relationship between the text and the author, representing the dynamic construction of the author's identity and the generation of text meaning. Process. At the same time, this article attempts to use modern generative artificial intelligence technology to re-examine Yan Ruoqu's process and results of identifying counterfeits in the "Ancient Book of Documents". This article provides different perspectives on how technology deals with author concepts and the sacredness of classical texts, as well as related issues such as intertextuality and stability in literature.

In 1895, the first printing machinery factory, Li Chung Chang Machine Factory, was established in Shanghai, marking the transition of Chinese printing industry from woodblock printing to the mechanical age. Printers and publishers, as the carrier of material culture, have had an impact on the creation and distribution of Literary works. Before the mechanical age, official and private printing based on artisanal craftsmanship carried the public moral pursuits of the literati and scholars。But the situation changed in the course of economic development in the late Ming, when the book business gradually developed and commercial interests were gradually legitimised, meaning that books could be materialised objects carrying both moral and monetary values. When western technology was introduced to Shanghai， it combined with Chinese printing and publishing culture and business, finally transforming printing and publishing into mechanised production industry. The carrier feature of books is amplified several times over, culminating in printing capitalism. This revolution held authors and print publishers hostage, fostered the growth of modern Chinese literature, and allowed a commercially oriented readership market to expand. Meanwhile, in the field of literary writing, the old Chinese cultural values and behaviours have been impacted. The literati, intent on upholding the moral ideal of non-profit-making, have had to reconcile and balance their ideals and business under the impact of new technology and capital. Through specific literary works, such as Mao Dun's The Second Chapter of the Right, and The Young Printer，this paper will analyse the new authorial persona of writers who positioned themselves as disseminators of technology and enlighteners of progressive thought in the new technological environment and capital culture during the opening period of modern Chinese literature.

This paper contends that certain overbroad and misplaced "anti-machine" rhetoric has undermined the attempts to affirm the uniqueness of "biotranslator," presumed to differ from "machine translation." It aims, therefore, to further clarify the concept of translator-author creativity, particularly when it is not merely framed as an "added value," and what this creativity entails in the machine era. Additionally, this paper investigates whether contemporary machines, including machine-assisted translation tools and their operational mechanisms, contribute to enhancing the capabilities of translator-authors.