QUESTÕES DE EXÍLIO E ETNIA NA FICÇÃO DE DIONNE BRAND E JAMAICA KINCAID.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O presente trabalho explora a questão do exílio sob o ponto de vista da mulher. Para tanto, os contos “On seeing England for the first time”, de Jamaica Kincaid, e “Blossom”, de Dionne Brand, são discutidos levando em conta questões como a sensação do “não-pertencimento” e a dificuldade da condição feminina no auto-exílio. Nas duas histórias, as personagens migram de algum lugar do Caribe para países da América do Norte – EUA e Canadá, respectivamente. Não só a condição migrante se mostra como um impedimento de “assimilação”, mas também a condição feminina e étnica. Alguns conceitos extraídos dos textos “Can the Subaltern speak?” (1994), de Gayatri Spivak, e da coletânea Other solitudes: Canadian multicultural fictions (1995) também fazem parte da análise. Abstract: This work explores the question of the exile under the perspective of women. For this purpose, the short stories “On seeing England for the first time”, by Jamaica Kincaid, and “Blossom”, by Dionne Brand, are discussed taking into consideration aspects such as the feeling of inadequacy and the drawbacks of the female condition in self-exile. In both stories, the characters move from places in the Caribbean to countries in North America – USA and Canada, respectively. Not only the migrant condition is an impeding factor to “assimilation”, but also the female and racial condition as well. Some concepts taken from the texts “Can the Subaltern speak?” (1994), by Gayatri Spivak, and the collection Other solitudes: Canadian multicultural fictions (1995) are also included in the analysis.
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 | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".