MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2751237325 · doi:10.7202/1040885ar

Indices de l’enfance et de la filiation dans les écrits ethnographiques de Gabriel Sagard

2017· article· fr· W2751237325 on OpenAlexaffvenue
François Paré, Sarah A. Reilly

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes littéraires · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of DurhamUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article se penche sur les conceptions de l’enfance et de l’adolescence dans les chapitres XII et XIII duGrand Voyage du pays des Huronsde Gabriel Sagard. Dès l’arrivée en Huronie, la rencontre du récollet, accueilli par ses hôtes wendats comme un « fils », s’effectue sur le mode de la proximité familiale. Et c’est cette relation idéalisée père/mère/enfant et son image transposée par Sagard dans le portrait singulier du village autochtone qui forment la substance de notre lecture des propos de Sagard sur l’enfance et la filiation. Interprétés dans le contexte plus général de la France du XVIIesiècle, les propos ethnographiques du missionnaire témoignent de son ambivalence devant la cohésion exemplaire de la famille wendate, dont il rend compte en détail dans ses descriptions de la petite enfance, et sa dissolution morale au moment où garçons et filles atteignent l’adolescence. Incapable de saisir la centralité de la transmission orale de la coutume et du savoir chez ses hôtes, Sagard en conclut que, dépourvue d’un patrimoine culturel légitime, transmissible par l’écriture, la société wendate sera par ce principe même amenée à s’éteindre.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes littéraires→Same topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis→French-language works237,207→