MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171885635 · doi:10.18192/analyses.v1i2.453

Prises de bec, prises de langue : le cas de la femme au pouvoir dans la farce conjugale de la Renaissance

2006· article· fr· W2171885635 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dora E. Polachek

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalyses Revue de littératures franco-canadiennes et québécoise · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubversionHumanitiesArtTopos theoryLiteraturePolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article offre une analyse de La Farce de la cornette (qui date du XVIe siècle et qui reste jusqu’à maintenant presque inconnue) en examinant comment le topos du désaccord conjugal devient une source de rire subversif destiné à déstabiliser les fondements de l’ordre patriarcal : religion, mariage, classe sociale. Figurée comme source de subversion, la femme adultère garde le dessus du début jusqu'à la fin grâce à sa maîtrise des possibilités polysémiques des mots, laquelle se situe au cœur de l’humour.AbstractThis article analyzes The Farce de la Cornette (which dates from the sixteenth century and which has remained up to now virtually unexamined) by examining how the topos of conjugal discord becomes a source of subversive laughter that aims to destabilize the very foundations of the patriarchal order: religion, marriage, social class. In a script where the adulterous wife is figured as the source of subversion, this article aims to demonstrate how her mastery of the polysemous possibilities of words lies at the heart of the humor created by the image of a woman who is on top from beginning to end.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations14
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalyses Revue de littératures franco-canadiennes et québécoiseSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207