Applicabilité du concept d'ostranénie à l'étude de la culture en anthropologie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Applicabilité du concept d'ostranénie à l'étude de la culture en anthropologie En présentant le concept A'ostranénie, cet article vise à ouvrir de nouvelles perspectives à l'étude anthropologique de la fonction esthétique et de la dynamique culturelle. De cette dernière, l'auteur retient surtout les aspects anti-normatifs-notamment la marginalité, le démesuré, l'inversion, le trickster -, tous liés à la polysémie et au calembour. D'autre part, dans la tradition théâtrale. Arlequin, en tant qu'émissaire des puissances infernales, révèle une dimension cachée de la réalité et joue ainsi un rôle semblable à celui de l'ostranénie en littérature. L'article examine l'application du concept d'ostranénie dans les domaines de la littérature, du folklore et de la phénoménologie; il propose, en conclusion, que la distribution des fonctions médiatrices soit étudiée de façon systématique et complète.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".