La reprsentation ambivalente de l'Autochtone dans le roman qubcois: vers une perspective postcoloniale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article will begin with a survey of the relatively small number of studies of the figure of the Native in the literature of Quebec and will then continue by considering critical studies of the Native in other former settler colonies such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Criticism from both Quebec and other former settler colonies links the representation of the Native to the need for the white settler to identify with his or her new territory, to criticize white society and to distinguish this society from its European ancestor. Next, by using the postcolonial theory of Homi Bhahba, this article relates the ambivalent nature of the Qubcois writer's representation of the Native to a lack present in the colonizer's psyche that leads to a partial identification with, yet at the same time fear of, the colonized other. This theoretical perspective leads to a different interpretation of the function of the Native in Quebec literature than in previous studies, which underlined the settler colony status of Quebec. By using Bhahba's theory, the representation of the Native can be more closely compared with paradigms of representation used in non-settler colonial contexts. The article concludes by noting that in spite of its contribution to our understanding of ambivalence in the representation of the Native, Bhabha's theory does not account for the metaphorical function played by the Native in Quebec literature of the Quiet Revolution.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".