MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2200626985 · doi:10.1353/ces.2015.0050

“White Settler Guilt”: Contemporary Ukrainian Canadian Prairie Literature

2015· article· en· W2200626985 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lindy Ledohowski

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian ethnic studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianWhite (mutation)EthnologyHistoryLinguisticsPhilosophyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ukrainians have been in Canada for at least 120 years, and in the federal multiculturalism debates of the 1960s and 1970s, Ukrainian Canadian groups were one of the most vocal, pushing for a recognition of other ethnic identities alongside what was at that time the discourse of the day of “two founding nations.” Interestingly, one of the ways that this ethnic group was able to make ground in these federal debates—ultimately leading to the policy shift from Biculturalism and Bilingualism to Multiculturalism and Bilingualism—was by making an argument for “founding fathers” status across the unbroken prairie. While there was a genuine desire for other ethnic identities to be recognized at the federal legal and political levels, there developed a realization by Ukrainian Canadians (and others) of the ways in which the sleight of hand required to place ethnic Ukrainians (among others) as the “first” inhabitants of the prairie space removed the pre-existing Aboriginal presence on that landscape. Many writers grapple with their awkward sense of wanting to honour their forbearers who did, in fact, emigrate and suffer great hardships, while simultaneously recognizing the colonial project that they have been co-opted into. Using contemporary literature, this article theorizes the relationship between the homesteaders and their descen-dents vis-à-vis Aboriginal presences in the prairie provinces. This article articulates four different models that authors use in an attempt to make sense of the simultaneous early presence of Ukrainian settlers and Aboriginal peoples across the Canadian landscape. Les Ukrainiens sont au Canada depuis au moins 120 ans et, dans les débats des années 1960 et 1970 sur le multiculturalisme fédéral, les groupes canadiens ukrainiens furent parmi ceux qui ont réclamé le plus haut et fort la reconnaissance d’autres identités ethniques parallèlement au discours de l’époque sur “les deux peuples fondateurs”. Il est intéressant que l’un des moyens de ce groupe ethnique est de faire avancer le débat fédéral - qui a ultimement conduit à un changement de politique du biculturalisme et du bilinguisme vers un multiculturalisme en gardant le bilinguisme - a été de se servir d’un argument en faveur “des pères fondateurs” dans des Prairies vierges. Alors qu’il y avait un désir sincère des autres identités de se faire reconnaître au niveau fédéral, légalement et politiquement, les Canadiens ukrainiens (et d’autres) ont commencé à prendre conscience du tour de passe-passe qu’il fallait opérer pour faire de leurs ancêtres (parmi d’autres ethnies) les “premiers” habitants de l’espace des Prairies, et qu’il effaçait la présence antérieure des autochtones. Bon nombre d’écrivains se battent avec un certain embarras à vouloir honorer leurs ancêtres qui ont, en fait, émigré et grandement souffert, tout en reconnaissant le projet colonial dans lequel ils ont été embrigadés. À partir de la littérature contemporaine, cet article porte sur la théorisation de la relation entre les pionniers et leurs descendants par rapport à la présence autochtone dans les provinces des Prairies. Il présente quatre modèles dont des auteurs se sont servis pour tenter de donner un sens à la présence initiale des colons ukrainiens et des peuples autochtones dans l’ensemble du territoire canadien.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.172 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian ethnic studiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207