Konstrukcija narativnog identiteta u romanima Davida Albaharija i Vladimira Tasića nastalim u Kanadi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we examined different ways of construction of \nnarrative identity in novels of David Albahari and Vladimir Tasic \nwritten in Canada, in emigration. The impact of social, historical and \ncultural context on the choice of narrative procedures were analyzed, \nas well as the impact of emigration discourse. Based on the \npresentation of space and the image of Other we examined different \npossibilities of spacious identification, as well as the identification \nwhich are developed out the relationship to Other. \nOn the textual level, the choice of the topic, the current historical \nmoment and the experience of emigration, to a certain extent, \ninfluences the selection of certain narrative procedures, such as the \npresence of homodiagesis, retrospektive and iterative narration, \nfrequent change of narrative perspective.’ \nOn the other hand, the construction of narrative identity is olso \nrealized on the basis of paratextual surroundings, primariliy on the \nbasis of diffrent ways in which the opus of those autors was presented \nto the publik, as well as on the baisis of context. In this peper as the \nprimary context wich structuring the narrative identity it's being \nanalyzed the postmodernism in it’s manifestation and theoretical \nform.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".