MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047386653 · doi:10.3828/jlcds.2010.12

Terms of <i>Dis</i> appropriation: Disability, Diaspora and Dionne Brand's <i>What We All Long For</i>

2010· article· en· W2047386653 on OpenAlex
Chris Ewart

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiasporaContext (archaeology)NarrativeAppropriationSociologyPejorativeGender studiesDisability studiesWarrantAestheticsHistoryLiteratureLinguisticsLawPolitical scienceArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article brings together the minority discourses of disability and diaspora. Their shared spaces, histories and narratives—although not always welcome—warrant greater examination. Various moments of diaspora discourse are visited (from Stuart Hall, Robin Cohen, and others) to illustrate how disappropriation of pejorative representations and terms of disability complicate and create theoretical reconsiderations for disabled/diasporic thought in contexts of race, gender, class, trauma, and performance. Although language itself often creates inadequacies through its own terms—especially in the context of expressing inexpressible atrocities—can words accommodate expression without relying on the worn out prosthetics of disability for cachet? The article also explores the treatment of madness and the limp in Canadian author Dionne Brand's transitional text What We All Long For (2005), where diaspora appears in marked terms, connected to the mind and body—informing and troubling characters and experiences....

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.330 · 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