Notice bibliographique
Résumé
To the Continuation of That Celebration… Robert Spoo It's not long since I took up again the work and play of editing the JJQ, this time in tandem with my colleague and co-editor, Jeff Drouin. If the bifocality of two editors is a novelty, we both have something to be grateful for in the singular continuity of Carol Kealiher and her long, steadying tenure as Managing Editor. I've had the honor of working alongside two world-class managers of this journal: Carol and Mary O'Toole. In fact, the longest-serving in-house editor of the JJQ (not counting Advisory Editors) is Carol, who has been in the role, if my count is correct, since her début in the issue for Fall 1992—a full thirty years and more! So, as we celebrate sixty years of the JJQ, we also celebrate the fact that Carol has been managing it for half of its existence. Her tenure has been longer than that of any of the journal's chief editors: five longer than Tom Staley's, ten longer than Sean Latham's, eighteen or so more than my once-and-future roles combined, three decades more than Jeff's. We can all—editors, scholars, and readers—be grateful for the devoted continuity with which Carol has blessed the JJQ. Continuity is the word. The JJQ has been continuous—four times a year, with occasional two-quarter mergings in double issues—for six decades, ever since Tom Staley founded it on his kitchen table or in his garage (origin stories vary) in Fall 1963. That's a long time for any scholarly journal, but it's utterly astonishing for a single-author journal. Only Joyce, with his capacious life and writings, and with the rich, learned, polytropic scholarship and readership that he has attracted, could have sustained this enterprise. Issues of the JJQ have grown from the slim, green-covered pamphlets of the early years to numbers that are hundreds of pages long. And there are institutions within this institution: readers can rely on regular items such as conference reports, articles, notes, Bill Brockman's Current JJ Checklist, reviews, and art features (such as, in this issue, Rob Berry's always enlightening and exquisite "Penelope Says" and Robert Amos's stunning reimaginings and re-imagings of Joyce and his texts). This double issue offers a wide range of thoughtful pieces: transgressive aesthetics and Joyce's revision of amorous traditions in literature (Angus McFadzean); feminist responses to the empire of the dictionary in the works of Joyce and Virginia Woolf (Emily James); a pscho-acoustic reading of Stephen Dedalus's sexual identity [End Page 7] in the soundscapes and mindscapes of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (Jeremy Lakoff); the resonances in Ulysses of turn-of-the-century Dublin charity bazaars, especially the optics-themed bazaar "Cyclopia" of 1896 (Keith Williams); the recycling of clothes and character in the "cultural drag" that is so wildly performed in "Circe" (Ashley Savard); the shifting creative balances of homeostatic equilibrium and entropic chaos in Ulysses and Finnegans Wake (Roy Benjamin); a skeptical reassessment of Joyce's purported remark that the "enigmas and puzzles" of Ulysses were his only passport to eternity (William M. Chace); an unpublished scene from Nuala O'Connor's latest novel, Nora; and a rebuke to certain male Joyceans by Molly Bloom. And the beautiful image for the cover is the creation of Bill Brockman and Sabrina Alonso. Not bad for a sixty-year-old journal! Robert Spoo The University of Tulsa Copyright © 2023 University of Tulsa
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,024 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,022 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,011 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,016 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,067 | 0,046 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».