Rethinking the revival and evolution of the Glengarry Scottish Highland Games: Antimodernism, commercialization, and cultural (re)production in rural eastern Ontario.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1784, after a prolonged and weary struggle to settle in North America, almost fifty families established a homogenous Scottish community in what is currently Glengarry County, Ontario. In 1840, the residents of Glengarry County established a Scottish Highland Games, but a lack of commitment and funding led to their discontinuation after only a few years. In 1948, following an absence of almost a century, the Glengarry Scottish Highland Games tradition was revived. This thesis examines the revival and evolution of the Glengarry Highland Games, including commercial, ideological, and cultural impacts. When rethinking the revival of the games in Glengarry, one cannot help but speculate why the summer of 1948 was chosen as the apposite date. An investigation, including archival resources, newspapers, and personal interviews, has illuminated several social developments that contributed to the revival. Glengarry residents celebrate the traditional dress, Celtic music, athletic pursuits, and history of the county by participating in the annual games and associating with the organizations that relentlessly maintain and perpetuate Scottish cultural traditions. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2004 .M37. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 43-05, page: 1607. Adviser: Scott Martyn. Thesis (M.H.K.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2004.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".