Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian aboriginal people have a long history of `internal colonialism.` Thomas King`s text shows us the rhetoric of subversion based upon its diverse strategies of discourse. The strategies are focused on the textual politics which disturb, decenter, deterritorialize, and trick the Euro-centered discourse which has been the colonizer`s. As Mikhail Bakhtin coined, verbal signs are the arena of class struggle. On the text of Thomas King, the discourses of the colonizer and the colonized cross and recross conflicting with each other. Firstly, Thomas King rewrites the narratives of the Europe in terms of the aboriginal people. Especially for the aboriginal people, narratives have been very significant spaces to appropriate and explicate the world. In his text, for example, he rewrites the Western creation story and converts it into an aboriginal version, which is the supplement and substitution of Euro-centered discourse with the aboriginal one. This is a trope of trope. He replaces the master trope of Europe by the trope of the slave. Secondly, he brings tricksters in his texts represented by coyotes. The coyotes in his text, like Signifying Monkey, fool, laugh, and trick the discourse of the colonizer and make cracks in the deep core of the sign system of the Eurocentrism. They prize apart in various ways the signifier and the signified to deride the presence of unified and stable signs of Euro-centered ideology. Thirdly, Thomas King mixes reality with fantasies, which serve to dismantle the fixed authority of master narratives. Bringing fantasies, he shows the fact that the Western discourses like the other discourses are constructs of signs. He reveals the unstability of the master discourse crossing the authoritative reality with various fantasies. In conclusion, albeit his hands are on the wheel of the aboriginal identity, his car is like David rushing against Goliath which is Eurocentric discourse. But his David is full of transformation, play, derision, and mockery of coyotes instead of stone.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.004 |
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".