L'entrance des écrivains africains et caribéens dans le système littéraire francophone : les oeuvres d'Alain Mabanckou et de Dany Laferrière dans les champs français et québécois
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If it is admitted that the field theory, systematized by Pierre Bourdieu, allowed to renew the approach of the literary phenomenon, its application in the field of the Frenchspeaking studies remains limited. This study examines the conditions of access to the French and Quebec French literary fields by the writers of African and Caribbean origin. The thesis proceeds to a sociological approach - the analysis leaning on the examination of the individual trajectories, the poetics of the works and the communications strategies of the authors - of the conditions of access to the writing, the publication, the literary socialization and the consecration in each of the fields of reception, that is the policy of reception of the legitimizing authorities and the place reserved for these migrant writings. An essential option consisted in approaching writers whose status and audience are already asserted on the French-speaking literary scene. For this purpose, the corpus is made up of two writers indisputably recognized : the former, Alain Mabanckou, especially present in the French field; the latter, Dany Laferrière, especially recognized in the Quebec French field. The comparison between the French and Quebec French fields ended in a new conception of the phenomena of entrance, by highlighting the positions, the postures and the writing strategies deployed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".