"Perhaps nobody has told you why the English are called Sahibs in India": Sara Jeannette Duncan's Imperialism for Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resume: Sara Jeannette Duncan, auteure de recits a la gloire de l'empire britannique, a compose un seul roman pour la jeunesse, The Story of Sonny Sahib . Peu connue, cette œuvre publiee en 1894 a ete reeditee a maintes reprises dans les premieres decennies du vingtieme siecle. Cecily Devereux analyse les manifestations de l'ideologie imperialiste dans ce recit, qui, bien qu'il ne soit pas entierement conventionnel, respecte les valeurs que la romanciere a exprimees dans ses autres romans que l'on retrouve dans le vaste corpus des ouvrages didactiques et imperialistes pour la jeunesse de l'ere victorienne. Summary: Anglo-imperial English-Canadian writer Sara Jeannette Duncan wrote only one children's book: The Story of Sonny Sahib was published in 1894 and, while it is not a well-known text of imperial children's literature, it did remain in print until well into the twentieth century. This paper considers the imperial and ideological work of this novel and begins to question this work in terms of the novel's relation to Duncan's other fiction and to imperial children's fiction in general: The Story of Sonny Sahib is not a formulaic novel, but it does align itself in important ways with both Duncan's grown-up fiction and the nineteenth-century proliferation of didactic and imperial writing for young people.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".