L’imaginaire national dans le roman pour adolescents en Belgique francophone et au Québec (1995-2005)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce mémoire compare la production romanesque adressée aux adolescents au tournant du XXIe siècle en Belgique francophone et au Québec, dans le but de démontrer l’influence de l’institution littéraire sur la construction textuelle d’un imaginaire national. Le premier chapitre consiste en une analyse institutionnelle. Le Québec et la Belgique francophone partagent plusieurs conditions de sociologie externe, notamment le fait d’évoluer dans une langue qui n’est pas majoritaire dans le pays et de présenter une littérature décentrée par rapport à la France. Néanmoins, l’institution littéraire québécoise a développé une autonomie qui n’a pas été atteinte en Belgique. L’analyse quantitative d’un corpus exhaustif composé de l’ensemble de la production romanesque adressée aux adolescents au tournant du XXIe siècle montre que l’ancrage géoculturel national dans les romans est quantitativement beaucoup plus important au Québec qu’en Belgique francophone, ce qui est certainement lié à la posture institutionnelle de la littérature dans ces deux espaces. Le second chapitre propose une analyse textuelle et thématique des romans publiés entre 1995 et 2005 par dix auteurs belges et dix auteurs québécois légitimés au sein de l’institution. L’étude du traitement de différents motifs dans les romans choisis révèle du côté de la Belgique une construction de l’imaginaire national moins profonde et plus problématique qu’au Québec. De l’ensemble, il ressort que si les romans contemporains québécois pour adolescents privilégient un enracinement et un attachement à la terre natale, leurs équivalents belges semblent refuser les discours trop nationaux et préférer une approche soit individuelle, soit mondiale. \n \nThe National Imaginery in Novels for Young Adults in French Belgium and Québec (1995-2005) \n \nThis thesis compares fiction aimed at teenagers at the turn of the 21st century in Québec and french Belgium with the goal of demonstrating the influence of the literary institution in the textual construction of a national imaginery. The first chapter consists in an institutional analysis. Québec and french Belgium share several external sociological conditions, notably their cultural evolution in a language that is not that of the majority in the country, and their status as decentralized literatures with regard to France. Despite this, the Québec literary institution has developed an autonomy that has not been achieved in Belgium. Quantitative analysis of the entire corpus of fiction aimed at teenagers produced at the turn of the 21st century shows that a national geocultural anchoring in novels is measurably much more prevalent in Québec than in french Belgium, which is certainly linked to the institutional placement of literature in each place. The second chapter contains a textual and thematic analysis of novels published between 1995 and 2005 by ten Québec authors and ten Belgian authors all established within the literary institution. A study of the treatment of different motifs in these novels shows the construction of a national imagination that is less deep and more problematic in Belgium than in Québec. On the whole, it becomes clear that while contemporary Québec novels for teenagers place importance on one's roots in and attachment to the homeland, the Belgian equivalents seem to eschew overly nationalistic discourse and favor either an individual or a global approach.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".