MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903271710 · doi:10.1558/rsth.37346

Missionaries as Interpreters

2018· article· en· W2903271710 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bronwyn A. Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueReligious Studies and Theology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyIndigenousWitnessPoliticsNegotiationLawInterpreterGovernment (linguistics)ExaggerationHistorySociologyClassicsPolitical sciencePhilosophyPsychologyLinguisticsPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In September 1877, the Canadian government and the Indigenous peoples of the southern portion of Alberta met at Blackfoot Crossing to negotiate the agreement known as Treaty 7. Contemporary descriptions of this meeting are of great historical, legal and socio-political significance. The recent publication of the journal of Father Léon Doucet, a Missionary Oblate of Mary Immaculate who laboured in Alberta between 1868 and 1939, has brought to light the missionary’s little-known account of the Treaty 7 talks. Doucet’s version of events differs from both oral histories and eye-witness statements in one important way: it recognizes Oblate Father Constantine Scollen as the chief interpreter at the negotiations. This paper will compare Doucet’s version to both oral and written accounts and will suggest that Doucet’s description of the Treaty 7 negotiations was influenced by his history with Father Scollen. Moreover, in 1908, Doucet began editing his notes and compiling them into a journal which was to be exhibited in a museum commemorating the Oblates. Doucet’s exaggeration of Scollen’s interpreter role at the Treaty 7 talks, as well as the numerous examples in the journal of the relationships fostered by the Oblates’ desire to learn Indigenous languages, suggest that, in Doucet’s mind, language was central to the Oblates’ mission to western Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligious Studies and TheologySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207