What does a nation-shaped literary history exclude from within and beyond Quebec?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter shifts the perspective by asking what it is that nation-based literary histories have excluded from their narratives. By discussing some of the gaps and silences in literary histories this chapter aims to explore what does not fit ‘the nation’. What might other narratives of the history of literature in francophone Canada reveal about the shape of the field and the tensions that are played out within it? Do the various omissions indicate that the very idea of literary history, with its traditional focus on the nation, is repressive, outmoded or obsolete? Or might it be more productive to think not about the end of literary history, but rather of its opening up to include alternative narratives? The chapter selects two different categories of literary production as examples both of what has often been excluded from literary histories of francophone Canada and what could, and in some cases already has, become the subject matter of alternative literary historical accounts. These are indigenous writing in French and the literary history of the francophone population beyond Quebec, the francophone diaspora.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".