Stratégies de réappropriation dans les littératures des Premières nations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’acte de prendre est derogatoire. Il deforme le plus souvent la signification ou l’usage initial de ce qui est approprie – a savoir, ce qui lie l’individu, ou la communaute, a un sentiment d’identite et d’appartenance a sa culture, a travers le langage par exemple. Les strategies d’intervention que l'on retrouve dans les litteratures des Premieres nations, inherentes aux jeux de langage (quel qu’il soit, l’anglais, le francais, le cri, l’innu, etc.) et aux performativites respectives, font usage d’un langage concu en termes de trouee: le langage, en tant que trouee, devient un point de rencontre, un carrefour a partir duquel le dialogue peut etre entrepris, au-dela des divisions linguistiques. J’entends donc par la « reappropriation du langage » une strategie decisive contre la complicite et la coercition, ainsi qu’un outil visant a une decolonization transformative.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".