The Place of Belletristic Writing in Scholarly Publishing: The Council of Editors of Learned Journals Keynote Addresses MLA Convention 2003
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
If literary awards were books, you could enter a library and find shelves of them, from the folio volumes of the Pulitzer and Nobel, requiring two arms to lift and carry to a table, to slim chapbooks like the Hillsborough Historic Society Award for Poetry on Topics of Local North Carolina History, Preferably about Orange County, which my daughter won when twelve years old. Yet if you wanted to find an award for the journals themselves, where all the individual award-winning writers publish their stories, poems, memoirs, essays, and other forms of belles lettres, or an award for the editors of those journals, even after an advanced search in WorldCat, as far as I am aware, you would turn up nothing. Such a ‘book’ has needed to be written - needed badly, in my view and in the view of other members of CELJ, whose membership includes many literary journals. In response to this embarrassing lack in our culture, CELJ worked during 2003 to establish such an award, and, at the MLA Convention in San Diego, the CELJ Award for Literary Achievement was unveiled. The award is actually a series of three rotating awards for Best New Literary Journal, Distinguished Literary Editor, and the Parnassus Award for Significant Editorial Achievement for a single issue of a journal that demonstrates a peak achievement of publishing mission. 1 It was only fitting, then, that the keynote addresses on the occasion of this important announcement be given by two prominent members of the literary publishing field. Hilda Raz, editor of the distinguished literary journal Prairie Schooner, and JeffreyLependorf, executive director of the Council of Literary Magazines and Presses, helped to celebrate the new award by speaking on the place of belletristic writing in scholarly publishing. Raz reflects on the long history of Prairie Schooner's role in nurturing writers, many of whom have gone on to become celebrated authors, and then outlines several ways in which such a publication contributes to the university institution of which it is a vital part. Lependorf puts forth the pointed argument that the literary journal, by providing a distinctly belletristic context for the critical essay, opens up scholarly work to a greater multiplicity of expression and meaning than is possible in a traditional scholarly publication. Freed from the constraints of the purely academic forum, criticism in the pages of literary journals, drawing equally on creative and scholarly purposes, can be radically opinionated, passionately reflective, critically experienced. Both Raz and Lependorf demonstrate that literary publishing in the academy is constitutive of the soul of the university.
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 | 0,049 | 0,140 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,094 | 0,198 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,007 |
| 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».