MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1545110503

Nation, Indigenization, the Beothuk: A Newfoundland Myth of Origin in Patrick Kavanagh’s Gaff Topsails

2006· article· en· W1545110503 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jennifer Bowering Delisle

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Canadian Literature · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyNational identityColonialismIdentity (music)NarrativeIndigenizationIndigenousHistoryLiteratureGenealogyGender studiesSociologyAnthropologyAestheticsArtLawPolitical scienceArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The of a national culture often begins with a foundational myth, a story that, as Stuart Hall writes, locates origin of nation, people, and their national character so early that they are lost in mists of, not 'real,' but 'mythic' time. For postcolonial nation, such origin myths are useful for constructing an identity that preceded, and therefore exists in defiance of, the ruptures of colonization, and that unifies many cultures and societies into one people. But what about invader-settler colonies? While motivated by same desire to create a national identity that stands against imperial motherland, these states cannot construct their origins so easily, for narrative of nation must begin with troublesome moment of colonial invasion. In his 1996 novel Gaff Topsails , Patrick Kavanagh creates a myth for primordial national identity of Newfoundland. Kavanagh's myth reconfigures colonial moment as a myth of indigenous birth. His work is an attempt to write a national of Newfoundland that serves to distance Newfoundlanders both from colonial exploiters and from Canadian identity.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0310.023
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Canadian LiteratureSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207