De la «Conjonction» à l’ «Union»: L’Harmonie Dialogique dans les Contes Fantastiques Chinois
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans l’article present, nous aimerions analyser, en employant les modeles narratifs du semioticien Algirdas Julien Greimas, deux contes fantastiques chinois dans une œuvre classique chinoise: Sou shen ji (ou A la recherche des esprits ), un recueil de contes fantastiques compose par Gan Bao, historien et lettre repute sous la Dynastie Dong Jin. Les deux contes representatifs choisis relatent des histoires entre les hommes et les esprits animaux. Nous avons essaye, a la lumiere des analyses textuelles, d’un cote, de demontrer qu’il existe une serie de difficultes quand on applique les modeles greimassiens a un corpus chinois, et d’un autre cote, d’eclairer la tendance «inter-subjective» et dialogique entre les etres humains et les esprits animaux dans ces recits fantastiques. Nous avons pu montrer aussi que deja dans ces recits composes au 4 e siecle de la Chine antique, il existe une harmonie dialogique (au sens bakhtinien), une sorte d’ «union» au lieu de «conjonction», une union qui ne signifie pas l’unification ou la fusion absolue, mais qui souligne au contraire l’independance, l’autonomie et la co-existence des sujets differents.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".