Naissance d’une critique ? La présence de l’occitan dans la presse béarnaise de la fin du XVIIIe siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La présence de la langue occitane dans la presse ne date pas, comme on le croit généralement, du XIXe siècle. Dès les dernières décennies du XVIIIe siècle, des expériences sont menées, notamment en Béarn. L’avocat palois Nicolas Suberbie-Cazalet (1743-1817) dirige la publication d’une Circulaire des Pyrénées dont 49 numéros paraissent en 1778-1779. L’entreprise est un échec mais quelques années plus tard, une nouvelle formule voit le jour sous la forme d’un Tableau annuel du Béarn (1784-1787). Dans chacune de ces publications, l’occitan (béarnais) est présent par le biais de poèmes, mais aussi, à l’occasion, de comptes rendus ou de jugements littéraires critiques. Cette présence de l’occitan dans la presse béarnaise témoigne d’une légitimité qui doit toutefois affronter les difficultés commerciales, liées à l’étroitesse du marché, et un dynamisme insuffisant de la production littéraire.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".