Manifester la différence. Place et fonctions des manifestes dans les littératures francophones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans quelle mesure le rapport de l’écrivain à la langue et à la littérature est-il déterminé, au Québec et dans les Antilles, par une « surconscience linguistique »? C’est ce que cette étude examine, en se penchant dans un premier temps sur deux manifestes québécois, ceux de Michèle Lalonde et de Marco Micone. De celle-là à celui-ci, on passe de l’affirmation de l’identité nationale face à la domination de l’Autre (l’anglophone) à l’affirmation de la participation de l’Autre (l’immigrant) à la littérature québécoise. Puis, dans un deuxième temps, l’on compare la position des auteurs de L’éloge de la créolité à celle d’Edouard Glissant, montrant que là où l’institution littéraire québécoise s’est solidifiée au point de devenir la référence des écrivains migrants, l’institution littéraire antillaise en est encore à l’étape de projet.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".