Actes de cadrage, narratologie et herméneutique — à propos de l’indétermination énonciative dans Sujet Angot de Christine Angot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente une discussion théorique et méthodologique au sujet des façons dont nous faisons sens de brouillages des voix narratives et de cadrages génériques (autobiographie, biographie, fiction, autofiction) dans un texte littéraire. Le roman Sujet Angot de Christine Angot sert d’exemple afin d’illustrer la diversité des interprétations suscitées par les constructions narratives qui problématisent leur énonciation – et leurs valeurs. Attentive aux actes de cadrage (« framing » - Goffman) à l’oeuvre dans la lecture, l’approche métaherméneutique défendue dans cet article observe aussi les régimes de valeurs liés aux actes de classification (Boltanski et Thévenot) afin d’illustrer les bénéfices potentiels – pour l’éducation et pour la vie civile – d’une prise en compte réflexive des divers cadres conceptuels qui informent la lecture littéraire.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".