Le cheval de la langue : héroïsme et art d'écrire dans <em>Galeran de Bretagne</em> de Renaut
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La tradition romanesque médiévale fait un usage massif du prologue. L’entrée en texte y représente le lieu de légitimation privilégié de l’œuvre. Le prologue manquant de Galeran de Bretagne, roman du début du XIIIe siècle, nous prive de renseignement sur les intentions poétiques du trouvère Renaut. Ce sont donc les aventures des personnages qui reflètent la poétique du récit. Or, si les prouesses chevaleresques du héros proposent le reflet des arts rhétoriques qui sous-tendent la création romanesque, le talent musical de l’héroïne et sa dextérité à manier l’aiguille revêtent eux aussi une fonction particulière. Cet article montre comment, au sein d’un roman d’amour, la représentation d’un couple amoureux influence l’analogie entre l’écrivain et le héros.AbstractMedieval romance tradition was deeply indebted to the notion of the prologue. The prologue represents the privileged site of legitimation in this genre. Galeran de Bretagne, romance of the XIIIth Century — which has no prologue — therefore cannot reveal the poetic designs of Renaut, the poet. So it is through the adventures of the characters that the poetry is introduced into the narrative. While the chivalric prowess of the hero underwrites the rhetorical arts of the romance, the musical and sewing talents of the heroine are at least as important. This article will demonstrate how, in the love story that the romance tells, the representation of the couple in love effects the analogy between the poet and the hero.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".