Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article aborde la trilogie de Marie-Claire Blais, Manuscrits de Pauline Archange, sous l’angle de l’autorité narrative, c’est-à-dire des modalités de représentation et de fonctionnement de la voix narrative ainsi que des enjeux de légitimation qu’elle engage. La notion est d’autant plus intéressante que les Manuscrits de Pauline Archange déploient un vaste réseau thématique autour de l’autorité. Une telle perspective conduit à dégager les contradictions d’un récit porté par une voix autoritaire, fragilisée toutefois par le discours et le jugement de l’autre, et à montrer, dans un deuxième temps, que les tensions qui marquent la narration trouvent leur résolution dans les romans ultérieurs, tels Le sourd dans la ville, Visions d’Anna et, plus tard encore, le cycle inauguré par Soifs. Il ressort que, de la voix autoritaire à la voix autorisée, les Manuscrits de Pauline Archange mettent en scène la difficile conquête de légitimité de l’écriture, à comprendre comme l’atteinte d’une autorité positive de la voix narrative.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".