MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W36392190

Perry Nodelman. the Hidden Adult: Defining Children's Literature

2008· article· en· W36392190 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrea Schwenke Wyile

Notice bibliographique

RevueEnglish studies in Canada · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueThemes in Literature Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMagnum opusSubject (documents)Field (mathematics)Relevance (law)Reading (process)HistorySociologyLiteratureLawPolitical scienceComputer scienceArtLibrary science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Perry Nodelman. Hidden Adult: Defining Children's Literature. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins up, 2008. $35 paper; $43.95 cloth. Hidden Child: Defining Children's Literature is a definitive discussion of the field and genre of literature. Anyone who has studied literature or has a professional interest in any of the related fields that deal with this complex subject knows that attempts to define what one is dealing with are central and continual and yet answers remain curiously elusive and unsatisfactory as they require seemingly endless qualification and reconsideration. This factor explains the length and circuitous nature of Nodelman's book and its necessary density in many parts. Trying to define literature is how we all start out in the field; Hidden Adult is a testament to the wide-ranging and ongoing nature of such work--in Nodelman's case, the culmination of nearly four decades of prolific scholarly work. Beverly Lyon Clark's statement that The Hidden Adult is arguably his magnum opus neatly sums up the significance and authority of Nodelman's latest critical contribution. While Nodelman strives to be as clear and accessible as possible, his Pleasures of Children's Literature is the better starting place for the uninitiated. Hidden Adult's primary audience is those familiar with or working in the field, as such a discussion demands: it is thorough and comprehensive, particularly the third chapter in which Nodelman engages the major debates and their related concerns that have brought us to the current moment in literature studies. He situates his exhaustive discussion within the broader theoretical context of literary studies and production, drawing on well over four hundred sources and focusing on aspects he argues shape both the field and the genre, which are informed by a matrix of adult social forces forever jostling to maintain some control over the other, the child. wide-ranging discussion throughout the book is helpfully signposted with subheadings and frequent reminders of the point(s) being presented or brought forward from an earlier section. Nodelman approaches his formidable topic in an original and effective fashion over four chapters. In the first, Six Texts, he works through close readings of Maria Edgeworth's The Purple Jar (1801), Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (1865), Hugh Lofting's (unexpurgated) Dr Dolittle (1920), Beverly Cleary's Henry Huggins (1950), Ezra Jack Keats's Snowy Day (1962), and Virginia Hamilton's Plain City (1993), a project that uncovers the common ground these divergent share. Nodelman notes that texts identified as 'children's literature' [are] included in this category by virtue of what the category implies, not so much about the category itself as about its intended audience, which makes it a highly unusual category (3). Tough the involvement of adults in all aspects of literature is in plain view, it is amazing how easily adults themselves lose sight of this basic critical factor in the production and reception of children's books (read books for children). Nodelman's aim is to expose the hidden adult every turn along with such inevitable ironies as the second, hidden text, which he calls a shadow text (8) that say[s] less than it hints at (9), yet which can result in child readers understanding] more than is actually said (9). In this first chapter, the fundamental issues, revisited throughout the book, of binary opposition, of ambivalence, of the doubleness of home and away, and of variation are established--all of these hinge on the opposition of child and adult without which there would be no such thing as literature. forty-five shared characteristics examined are helpfully listed in point form the end and then reformulated in paragraph form the end of chapter 3. Chapter 2, the shortest of the four (forty-five pages), [e]xplor[es] [a]ssumptions and embarks on the central argument that literature is a genre. …

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: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,531
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,677

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 technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
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 Opus0,015
Tête enseignante GPT0,210
Écart entre enseignants0,196 · 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'étudeSans objet
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
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEnglish studies in CanadaMême sujetThemes in Literature AnalysisTravaux en français237 207