Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les vieux habits de l'Empire Façonner le sujet colonial Cet essai explore le rôle du vêtement dans la fabrication des sujets coloniaux et des communautés « ethniques ». Il s'intéresse aux raisons pour lesquelles les missions britanniques installées au XIXe siècle dans le sud de l'Afrique, qui s'efforçaient de re-former les cœurs et les âmes des Africains, consacrèrent tant de temps à vêtir les corps noirs. L'habillement, pour les chrétiens, était le « tissu de la civilisation »; sa consommation adéquate était considérée comme un moyen essentiel permettant de modeler de nouvelles formes de soi, de désir et de travail. Le costume européen (neuf ou d'occasion) provoqua effectivement des transformations; mais il déclencha aussi un jeu politique complexe autour de l'habillement, intervenant dans la fabrication de nouvelles identités ethniques et de classe, mais encourageant aussi de nouveaux croisements avec les styles vestimentaires indigènes. Si les Africains remodelèrent leurs traditions à partir des tissus coloniaux, ils imposèrent souvent des modes locaux d'appropriation, jouant de manière imprévue sur les possibilités de la culture marchande.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".