L'identité multiculturelle au Canada depuis les années 1990 : de la consolidation à la mise en question?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, nous soutenons que, dans les années 1990, le conflit entre les nations fondatrices du Canada, linguistiquement définies, a contribué à consolider le multiculturalisme et à en faire une partie intégrante de l'identité nationale canadienne. La conséquence de cette consolidation - ou encore sa condition - a été que celui-ci n'a plus été défini en termes de «groupes» mais en termes individualistes et libéraux. Il était donc peu propice à intégrer les revendications pour les droits collectifs et les institutions parallèles qui ont réémergé sur la scène politique au début des années 2000. Aujourd'hui, il semble que le Canada soit en train de joindre - bien que tardivement - les rangs des nombreux pays qui redéfinissent leur identité nationale en faisant à nouveau appel aux notions d'une culture et d'une Communauté unique.In this paper, I argue that the conflict between Canada's linguistically defined founding nations helped to consolidate multiculturalism as part of Canadian national identity in the 1990s. As a side-effect—or condition—of this consolidation, multiculturalism abandoned the language of groups and was redefined in liberal-individualist terms. As such, it was unprepared to reintegrate the claims for group rights and parallel institutions that reemerged on the political scene in the early 2000s. Today, it looks as if Canada is joining—albeit as a latecomer—the widespread trend of countries that are redefining their national identities yet again in terms of (one) shared culture and 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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".