MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795601824

Heterogeneous Representations of Chinese Women in Young Adult Literature: A Postcolonial Reading

2007· article· fr· W2795601824 on OpenAlexaffabout
James C. Greenlaw

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Children's Literature / Littérature canadienne pour la jeunesse · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientalismStereotype (UML)HumanitiesArtReading (process)EthnologyGender studiesHistoryLiteratureSociologyPsychologyPhilosophyLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resume: Les ecrivains occidentaux ont toujours donne une vision reductrice de la culture chinoise. Dans les films et les romans presentant des personnages chinois, les femmes sont toujours conformes aux stereotypes de la femme-dragon ou de la jeune fille-fleur de lotus. A la lumiere des theories du discours orientaliste d'Edward Said et de Lisa Lowe, le present article montre les differences dans la presentation des Chinoises entre les auteurs d'ascendance europeenne et les ecrivains sino-canadiens et americains. Summary: Orientalist texts by Western writers have traditionally tended to essentialize Chinese culture and to stereotype Chinese people. in books and films which contain Chinese characters, but which have been produced by dominant culture North American and European authors and directors, representations of Chinese women have usually conformed to the stereotypes of the dragon lady or the lotus blossom baby. In the following analysis, the postcolonial literary theories of Edward Said, Lisa Lowe, and others are used to compare the depictions of Chinese women which can be found in Eurocentric texts with the more heterogeneous representations to be discovered in Chinese American and Chinese Canadian literature for young adults.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.207 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Children's Literature / Littérature canadienne pour la jeunesseSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207