Mark Paul Richard . Loyal but French: The Negotiation of Identity by French‐Canadian Descendants in the United States . East Lansing : Michigan State University Press . 2008 . Pp. x, 388. $34.95.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If one can read only one book on Americans of French Canadian descent, Mark Paul Richard's is it. The past generation has produced a number of community studies of Franco-Americans—northeastern Americans of French Canadian ancestry. Nearly all of those studies by Americans have focused on the immigration and settling-in process of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries as preparation for eventual assimilation. Studies by Canadians have emphasized the influence of French-speaking clerics, lawyers, and men of letters in preserving survivance—the retention of French language, the Roman Catholic faith, and the traditions of Quebecois rural society in the face of assimilation. Richard rewrites that history of Franco-Americans in two ways. First, he carries their story from immigration and settling-in to the present day. Secondly, he abandons the survivance v. assimilation debate. To do so, he focuses on Lewiston, Maine, perhaps the most persistently Franco-American city in the United States. Franco-Americans constituted sixty-five percent of the city's population by 1931. Richard exploits census, property, and city directory data, the papers of the city's religious orders, naturalization and voting records, diocesan archives, and a complete run of Lewiston's French-language newspaper, Le Messager. These sources allow him to examine Lewiston's entire Franco-American society, not just the articulate elite. What he demonstrates for that city applies in most ways to any Franco-American community.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.005 |
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".