«Docteur, suis-je un anglophone enferme dans un corps de francophone?» Une analyse intersectionnelle de la «temporalite de trans-crip-tion» dans des societes resume capacitistes, cisnormatives et anglonormatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir d’une perspective queer, transactiviste et intersectionnelle et mobilisant une méthodologie fondée sur une généalogie critique, le présent texte transpose le concept de la « temporalité crip» (« crip time») aux personnes trans et aux minorités linguistiques. Cet article propose un néologisme, soit la « temporalité de trans-crip-tion », qui englobe une triple temporalité que vivent (1) les personnes handicapées (« temporalité crip ») ; (2) les personnes trans («temporalité trans-crip ») ; et (3) les francophones en situation minoritaire et les personnes non anglophones (« temporalité de trans-crip-tion/traduction »). Cette contribution vise à stimuler les dialogues entre ces groupes marginalisés ainsi que leurs mouvements sociaux et champs d’études connexes. From a queer, transactivist, intersectional perspective, and adopting a critical genealogy methodology, the article extends the concept of “crip time” to trans people and linguistic minorities. The article suggests a neologism, “trans-crip-t time,” that captures a triple temporality experienced by (1) disabled people (“crip time”); (2) trans people (“trans-crip time”); and (3) minority Francophones and non-Anglophones (“transcript/translation time”). The article aims to stimulate dialogue between these marginalized groups and their associated social movements and fields of study.
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 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".