MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032229832 · doi:10.1093/fs/kns018

Pontus de Tyard: errances et enracinement. Actes du Colloque international de Bissy-sur-Fley (23–25 septembre 2005) <i>Pontus de Tyard: errances et enracinement. Actes du Colloque international de Bissy-sur-Fley (23–25 septembre 2005)</i> . Edited by F <scp>rançois</scp> R <scp>ouget</scp> . (Colloques, congrès et conférences sur la Renaissance européenne, 60). Paris: Honoré Champion, 2008. 320 pp., ill. Hb €59.00.

2012· article· fr· W2032229832 on OpenAlexaffabout
John F. McClelland

Bibliographic record

VenueFrench Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRenaissance Literature and Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtChampionArt historyHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For all his activity as a Pléiade poet, long-lived writer on an astonishing variety of humanist subjects, adviser to Henri III, member of the Académie du Palais, and embattled bishop during the Wars of Religion, Pontus de Tyard and his work have remained, as Jean-Claude Carron underlines, mostly invisible both to the general public and to French seiziémistes (p. 132). Foreign scholars (Frances Yates, Silvio F. Baridon, John C. Lapp, Kathleen M. Hall) began to study him in the 1940s and 1950s, and this tradition continued with theses in Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, and the USA. It is, however, chiefly owing to the efforts of the Canadian scholar Eva Kushner, and secondarily to those of Sylviane Bokdam (Paris XII), that Tyard has come to occupy a recognized place on the sixteenth-century map. His complete works have started to appear, and conferences devoted exclusively to him were held in 1998 and 2005. The present publication, the proceedings of the 2005 conference (at Tyard's own château) celebrating the fourth centenary of his death, contains twenty papers of unequal length plus an ‘Avant-propos’ and an introduction. Except for the old-fashioned reliance on footnote references, the volume is in a very readable format and mostly exempt from error (however, for ‘Bissy’ read ‘Bragny’ (p. 14), for ‘Bongoutx’ read ‘Jongoux’ (pp. 41, 43), and for ‘Jacques de Vintimille’ read ‘Francesco da Milano’ (p. 136)). The theme of ‘errances et enracinement’ is meant to emphasize both Tyard's literal attachment to Burgundy and his ‘wanderings’ in Paris; and his figurative, spiritual roots in Ficinian Christianity and the intellectual curiosity that took him in many other directions. The quality of the papers is almost uniformly high and most will interest and inform even those readers with a good knowledge of Tyard's œuvre. Some adduce extratextual evidence to situate him at home and, so to speak, abroad; others submit his best-known works to very learned intertextual analysis; still others (Marie-Madeleine Fragonard, Jean Céard) lucidly explore his less familiar, relatively inaccessible late books, providing extensive quotations from these texts so that the argument need not be taken on faith alone. For the non-specialist, the essays devoted to Tyard's poetry (particularly Heidi Marek, François Rigolot, S. Bokdam, and Philip Ford) certainly deepen and illuminate our understanding of Renaissance lyricism in general; while Ilana Zinguer on translation and Sophie Kessler-Mesguich on Tyard's Hebrew and Aramaic dictionaries and grammars broaden our perspective by reminding us that French Renaissance thinkers did not limit themselves to an occidental, Greco-Christian world view. Jean Vignes, relying on documents rather than suppositions, investigates Tyard's contribution to the late century debates over music and measured verse and clarifies at last his role in the academies of Charles IX/Baïf and Henri III. Finally, Carron's excellent synthèse, which ought to have been better placed, demonstrates that the ‘déconcertante complexité’ of Tyard's writings arises from his deep-seated Christianity. His religiosity both informed his errances into rationalism and deformed the results of his research, thereby diminishing his originality and, concomitantly, reducing his interest and importance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2280.074

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrench StudiesSame topicRenaissance Literature and CultureFrench-language works237,207