MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045830087 · doi:10.7202/039392ar

Les pérégrinations linguistiques et identitaires dans le roman Santiago de Simone Chaput

2010· article· fr· W2045830087 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Estelle Dansereau

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers franco-canadiens de l Ouest · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La littérature d’expression française contemporaine de l’Ouest canadien rejette aujourd’hui les «totalités» immuables qui ont défini traditionnellement l’identité et le territoire pour repenser l’appartenance identitaire en d’autres termes. Les oeuvres récentes de Simone Chaput, écrivaine francophone du Manitoba, participent à cette tendance, surtout dans leur représentation de l’errance. Il est frappant cependant de constater que la langue d’écriture semble déterminer l’attitude qu’adopte l’auteure envers les déplacements géographiques et leur fonction identitaire. L’errance, dans son roman Le coulonneux, est motivée, d’une part, par le retour au lieu des origines constituées en mémoire construite par le sujet même et, d’autre part, par un élan complémentaire de fuites et de quêtes viscérales qui doit précéder la reconstruction du moi. Or, en 2004, Simone Chaput a fait paraître Santiago, son premier roman écrit en anglais. L’étude de cet ouvrage dans le contexte des récits de pérégrination et au regard des traversées linguistiques et culturelles effectuées permet de postuler certaines différences fondamentales quant aux liens entre la langue et l’imaginaire dans la francophonie canadienne minoritaire actuelle.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers franco-canadiens de l OuestSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207