Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Les Tetes a Papineau (1981) by Jacques Godbout is an ironic allegorical rejoinder to the failure the 1980 referendum that would have afforded sovereignty-association status to Quebec. Inspired by the adage, cela ne prend pas la tete a Papineau, or, doesn't take a genius, this rambunctious narrative chronicles the lives and times Francois and Charles, twins conjoined at the neck who sustain each other physiologically-each coordinating with the other even to breathe-but speak primarily French and English, respectively. They grow up in relative harmony despite markedly different personalities and pursuits, their monstrosity affording economic and functional advantages that propel them through the stock experiences childhood lived with disability in North America-regular press coverage, a biography, product sponsorships, and even mythical status in faraway lands. They are able to handle a busy promotional schedule thanks to creative coordination, as well: sleeping in shifts allows them to earn a college degree in half the time, coordinated multitasking results in dazzling public appearances, and bilingualism makes them doubly efficient at networking a Canadian crowd. The text opens with the arrival Dr. Northridge, a neurosurgeon with plans to cure them by means an intricate surgery merging halves their brain within a single cranium. Despite careful planning that includes tracking by means computer mediation how their brains interface, Dr. Northridge is surprised to find, mid-surgery, that a single cranium cannot accommodate the volume brain that must be preserved: Charles awakens to find that he is irremediably monolingual and thus unable to finish-or even understand-the personal account the cure that he and Francois had undertaken together.This bi-graphie (sic), a cautionary tale about presumptions progress, turns out to be very much of two minds, marked by deep ambivalence about medical intervention, voice and language, autonomy and interdependence, belonging and loss. It seems a fitting entree en matiere as commentary both on the primacy English in knowledge-making and the analogous superiority that is afforded continental French (of France) vis-a-vis its Francophone cousins in the rest the world. We cannot help but note in passing how well the two-headed adventures Francois and Charles characterize this project, as we draft together via computer-mediated communication, time and again bumping up against ingrained assumptions long-held hierarchies within the Francophone world and the study disability. These hierarchies call into question the very notion any inclusive field study, so ill-fitted does the western lens disability studies sometimes seem to various regions the Francophone world. The brain is much bigger than the cranium, as it were, and discursive operations that continually seem to delimit disability studies as we understand and practice it prevent knowledge, identification, and mutual reconnaissance (selon Paul Ricoeur).Sustaining world languages and cultures has everything to do with the future disability and its study. The vast majority people with disabilities today live in the majority world, their impairments frequently the result our political folly (see Davidson). On the other hand, the languages they speak, although spoken by millions, enter our world knowledge-making scarcely at all. Cures for disability continue to seem desirable to many in the same way learning English or French maintains its cachet in much the world. Colonialism has for hundreds years embodied a certain kind progress enacted through brutal tactics assimilation. Martinican psychoanalyst and revolutionary, Frantz Fanon, is among the earliest writers to have critiqued these assumptions and their relationship to mental health. Writing about individual and collective experience, he formulates the deleterious impact normative expectations dominant culture and language as an impulse to mimic them. …
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».