MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069201051 · doi:10.1177/0021989409359852

The Jahaji-Bhain Principle: A Critical Survey of the Indo-Caribbean Women’s Novel, 1990-2009

2010· article· en· W2069201051 on OpenAlexaff
M. Reza Pirbhai

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Commonwealth Literature · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCaribbean history, culture, and politics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismSubjectivityGender studiesEthnocentrismContext (archaeology)Relation (database)PoliticsPoeticsHistorySociologyLiteratureAnthropologyPoetryArtPhilosophyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides the first critical survey of the Indo-Caribbean women’s novel, a distinct sub-genre which now spans approximately two decades. The survey examines the way these novels critically map the trajectory of Indo-Caribbean women’s lives from the moment of colonial servitude to the post-colonial present, through highly individuated expressions of Indian female subjectivity, in a context where sexual and racial politics have so often overdetermined women’s lives. It anchors its discussion of these novels in the feminist poetics of the “ jahaji-bhain principle of affiliation”, which advocates a more fluid and racially inclusive application of the ethics of community epitomized by jahaji-hood, a traditionally male-dominant and ethnocentric system of inter-relation borne out of the history of indentureship. Writers discussed include those who have published several or more works in the genre — namely Lakshmi Persaud, Jan Shinebourne, Shani Mootoo and Oonya Kempadoo — as well as first-time novelists Ramabai Espinet, Joy Mahabir, Niala Maharaj, Narmala Shewcharan, Ryhaan Shah and Andrea Gunraj.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0240.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Commonwealth LiteratureSame topicCaribbean history, culture, and politicsFrench-language works237,207