Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aims to consider Foucauldian ‘Power’ and its dimensions in the select short stories of R. K. Narayan’s Malgudi Days (1982). To that end, Foucauldian ‘Hegemony’ and ‘Resistance to Power and Limits of Power’ are discussed in these select short stories: “The Blind Dog”, “Forty-Five a Month”, “A Willing Slave”, “Leela’s Friend”, and “Selvi”. The study further shows the way the clusters in turn are related to each other and at the same time contribute to the Foucauldian concepts. Furthermore, Foucauldian ‘Hegemony’ and ‘Resistance to Power and Limits of Power’ are created through ‘Power’ which exists in various forms. Key words : Michel Foucault; Power; Resistance to power; Limits of power; Hegemony Resume La presente etude vise a examiner la “Puissance” foucaldienne et ses dimensions dans les histoires courtes de certains jours Malgudi RK Narayan (1982). A cette fi n, «L’hegemonie» foucaldienne et la «Resistance au pouvoir et les limites de la puissance» sont discutes dans ces histoires courts selectionne:“le chien aveugle’’, “Un mois de la Quarante-Cinq”, “Un esclave volontaire”, “Ami de Leela”, et le “Selvi”. L’etude montre en outre la facon dont les grappes a leur tour sont lies les uns aux autres et en meme temps contribuer a des concepts foucaldiens. En outre, «L’hegemonie» foucaldienne et «Resistance au pouvoir et limites de la puissance» sont crees par “Power” qui existe sous diverses formes. Mots cles : Michel Foucault; Puissance; La resistance au pouvoir; Les limites de la puissance; L’hegemonie
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".