Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le conte oral est un genre séculaire qui fait partie intégrante du patrimoine culturel de chaque nation. Pourtant, les recherches théoriques se sont intéressées au récit écrit aux dépens du récit oral, dont les modalités et les conditions de production et de réception ne sont pas les mêmes. En effet, le conte oral traditionnel, pour exister, conjugue plusieurs systèmes sémiotiques. Cette intermédialité lui est indispensable pour produire le sens. Ainsi, et afin de mieux comprendre les mécanismes intrinsèques de ce genre littéraire particulier, cet article examine les procédés de création et de réception à partir d’un corpus de contes chaouis (berbères) dans une région où la tradition orale subsiste toujours. The folktale is a secular genre and belongs to the cultural heritage of each nation. However, literary theorists have concentrated on written narrative at the expense of oral traditions, whose conditions of production and reception are not the same. Indeed, traditional storytelling combines several semiotic systems. This intermediality is essential to produce meaning. Therefore, in order to better understand the intrinsic mechanisms of this particular literary genre, this article examines the processes of creation and reception of a number of chaouis (berber) folktales in a region where oral traditions still exist. Article reçu le 29/04/2011; accepté le 16/08/2011
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".