MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2010236236 · doi:10.1353/esc.2011.0004

"Holo what?" or, The Exceptional Business of Naming: A Dialogue

2011· article· en· W2010236236 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Mareike Neuhaus

Notice bibliographique

RevueEnglish studies in Canada · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueRhetoric and Communication Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLinguisticsRhetorical questionForegroundingNarrativeRhetoricSociologyIndigenousSentencePhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

"Holo what?" or, The Exceptional Business of Naming:A Dialogue Mareike Neuhaus (bio) North American indigenous literatures in English use what I call relational word bundles, a rhetorical structure that is exceptional both in form and origin. A relational word bundle effectively is a figure with significant narrative function that is combined with other such figures to form a text's narrative grid, thus functioning as synecdoche writ large. Given the relational word bundles' origin in a significant Indigenous language structure—the holophrase (one-word sentence)—a rhetorical analysis of relational word bundles from the perspective of a non-Indigenous scholar (that is, myself) is equally exceptional. This essay explores the rhetoric of relational word bundles from the perspective of both Indigenous rhetorics and classical rhetoric, focusing particularly on Canadian contexts. In the spirit of the exceptionality of relational word bundles, the essay takes the form of a dialogue between two scholars. Their conversation points to relational word bundles as the rhetorical expression of Indigenous notions of community and storytelling. Tracing the story of the relational word bundle's evolution, this dialogue also explores the ethics of reading, foregrounding questions all too often lingering in the background: What do critics do, how, and why do they do it, and what are the implications of their work? [End Page 63] Finally, it deserves mentioning that of the two characters featured in the dialogue one is a fictional version of myself, while the other functions as a kind of epitome of the various friends and colleagues—both Native and non-Native—with whom over the years I have had the pleasure to share my work. Why fictionalize myself, and why make this epitome an Oscar Wilde specialist? As Oscar Wilde once noted, "One should always be a little improbable" ("Phrases and Philosophies" 177). It's a sunny afternoon, sometime in July. People are sitting on the porch in front of a café somewhere in North America. Among them are Oscar, a writer and Oscar Wilde expert, and Kate, a scholar of Indigenous literatures; the two have known each other for a good number of years. Birds sitting on a nearby tree are chirping. Cars are passing by. Music can be heard playing from inside the café. Oscar. So, how's your summer going? Kate. The usual. I'm getting all too fond of not having to teach. (Both laughing.) Kate, more seriously. 'N how about you? (takes a sip from her coffee) Oscar. Oh, I've been working on this and that. Nothing spectacular. That is, I did start a new project. Kate, raises her eyebrows. What's that? Oscar, chuckling. You might enjoy this. The title I'm using is "Oscar Wilde's Influence on Shakespeare's Sonnets." Kate. Sounds better than "A Wildean reading of Shakespeare." Oscar. You betcha. (lights his pipe) Kate. But you're not planning to prove the existence of Willie Hughes, are you?1 Oscar. No, no, no, far from it. My point is that Willie Hughes, or whoever stands behind the letters W.H., is a mere fiction. Kate. A mere fiction? Oscar. Yes, I want to suggest a reading of Shakespeare's life as imitating his sonnets; the sonnets expressed Shakespeare's deepest desires, desires he didn't even know he had. Desires that had to be fulfilled eventually. Kate. Erotic desires, I assume? [End Page 64] Oscar, smirking. Of course, for fulfilled they were "between the sheets," so to speak, with all those real W.H.s Timothy Findley hints at in his play Elizabeth Rex.2 Kate. I get it, "Life imitates Art far more than Art imitates Life" (Wilde, "The Decay of Lying" 40). Oscar. Exactly. Kate. Just let me know once you're done so I can prevent you from committing suicide. Oscar, puts out his pipe. I'll probably die of this (waves his pipe) before I'm even close to finishing. (Both laughing.) Your turn, Kate. What is it that you're so fond of this summer? Kate. Nothing really original; I'm revisiting my work on the paraholophrase3— Oscar. Para what? Kate, slightly perturbed. Para-holo-phrase. Oscar, mocking her. A hollow paraphrase? Kate. Not...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,427
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,381

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,196
Tête enseignante GPT0,268
Écart entre enseignants0,071 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2011
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEnglish studies in CanadaMême sujetRhetoric and Communication StudiesTravaux en français237 207