Normes textuelles et construction d’une identité professionnelle
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les chroniqueurs de la presse écrite québécoise jouissent à l’heure actuelle d’une forte popularité, surtout en raison de l’originalité de leur écriture. Compte tenu de leur notoriété publique, nous cherchons à savoir s’ils ont développé une identité professionnelle qui diffère de celle des autres scripteurs en milieu journalistique. Dans cette optique, nous nous intéressons à la perception de certaines traditions textuelles, aussi appelées normes textuelles, aspect que nous traitons à partir d’un corpus d’entretiens semi-dirigés réalisés auprès de douze chroniqueurs qui écrivent pour des quotidiens à tirage élevé. Nous nous proposons d’analyser dans quelle mesure les chroniqueurs considèrent ces normes textuelles comme des constituants de leur identité professionnelle qui devraient régir leurs pratiques. Les résultats montrent que la place qu’accordent les chroniqueurs aux variations individuelles dans ces techniques d’écriture leur permet de se démarquer en tant qu’auteurs. Today, Quebec newspaper columnists are very popular, especially because of the originality of their writing. Given their popularity, the aim of this paper is to analyse if these columnists have developed a professional identity that differs from other writers in the journalistic community. To this end, we focus on the columnists’ perception of certain text traditions, i. e. textual norms. Our analysis bases on a data collection of semi-structured interviews with twelve columnists who write for daily newspapers. We examine the extent to which these columnists consider different textual norms governing their daily writing as components of their professional identity. The results show that the scope these columnists give to individual variation in well-established text traditions allows them to stand out as authors.
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.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it