Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consacre a l’etude du mimetisme entre Francais et Amerindiens dans la Nouvelle-France des XVIIe - XVIIIe siecles, cet article ne s’interroge pas tant sur les echanges, les transferts culturels et les processus d’acculturation qui caracterisent la rencontre – comme en temoigne l’adoption par certains colons de la pratique autochtone du tatouage –, que sur la facon dont les cultures, avec leurs logiques particulieres, se revelent et s’actualisent en toute spontaneite dans des contextes d’interaction exotique. L’attitude du comte de Frontenac qui, lors d’une conference a Montreal en 1690, danse et chante la guerre un tomahawk a la main parmi ses allies autochtones, est ainsi moins analysee comme une forme d’indianisation que comme le reflexe d’un homme de Cour passe maitre dans l’art de la representation. La propension des Amerindiens, dans certains contextes de la rencontre, a mimer les manieres, les gestes ou l’esthetique des Francais, est quant a elle distinguee de l’acculturation a proprement parler, et interpretee comme une forme ritualisee et spontanee d’apprehension de l’autre dans sa difference. Imiter les Francais, pour les autochtones, ne reviendrait pas a les parodier mais a les adopter, a etablir avec eux, par la mediation du rituel, une relation d’homologie et de connivence. Il ne s’agirait pas, au fond, en les mimant, de reconnaitre les Francais, mais d’annihiler toute possibilite d’emergence de l’alterite humaine et toute amorce d’histoire.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".