MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518138213 · doi:10.7202/1009129ar

Moments autofictionnels dans l’oeuvre romanesque de Philippe Djian. Auto-biographèmes factuels et métadiscursifs

2012· article· fr· W1518138213 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hugo Chavarie

Bibliographic record

VenueTangence · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La catégorisation générique de l’autofiction a connu maints revers depuis une trentaine d’années. Puisque le concept déborde à présent le domaine de la littérature, cet article présente une définition linguistique de l’autofiction comme configuration énonciative et stratégie discursive, au demeurant intermittente et ponctuelle, qui rend possible le discours du moi au sein de tout énoncé narratif ou fictionnel. S’appuyant sur cette réorientation théorique, l’auteur s’attache ensuite à l’analyse des moments autofictionnels dans le corpus que forment les dix-sept romans publiés à ce jour par Philippe Djian. Sur la base d’une distinction entre « auto-biographèmes » (Kerbrat-Orecchioni, L’énonciation, 1980) factuels (nom propre, données sociologiques, faits vécus) et métadiscursifs (poétique, éthique et esthétique propres à l’auteur), la recherche des indices qui permettent de mesurer la présence de l’auteur dans ses romans montre que le noyau central d’un discours de l’intime peut se cacher à même un récit apparemment fictionnel, c’est-à-dire ailleurs que dans les faits racontés.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTangenceSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207