MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086153728 · doi:10.17851/2238-3824.5.0.51-71

Pour une rhétorique du quotidien dans la littérature québécoise moderne

2011· article· fr· W2086153728 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danielle Forget

Bibliographic record

VenueCaligrama Revista de Estudos Românicos · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumo: Seja sob a forma quase oral dos monólogos de Clémence DesRochers seja na trama narrativa do romance Des Nouvelles d’Édouard, uma retórica do cotidiano se perfila nas obras literárias quebequenses; ela se faz presente a fim de provocar no leitor uma distância crítica. Por figuras de valor textual como o clichê e a ironia, ela oferece assim à reflexão uma transgressão das normas literárias e sugere uma ultrapassagem dos nossos reflexos de interpretação.Palavras-chave: Literatura canadense; língua francesa; Clémence DesRochers; Michel Tremblay; retórica. Résumé: Que ce soit sous la forme quasi-orale des monologues de Clémence DesRochers, ou dans la trame narrative du roman de Michel Tremblay, Des Nouvelles d’Édouard, une rhétorique du quotidien se profile dans les oeuvres littéraires québécoises; elle prend pour toile afin de provoquer chez le lecteur une distance critique. Par des figures à portée textuelle comme le clichê et l’ironie, elle offre alors à la réflexion une transgression des normes littéraires et suggère un dépassement de nos réflexes d’interprétation.Mots-clés: Littérature canadienne; langue française; Clémence DesRochers; Michel Tremblay; rhétorique.Keywords: Canadian literature; French; Clémence DesRochers; Michel Tremblay; rhetoric.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCaligrama Revista de Estudos RomânicosSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207