Anglo-Canadian Historiography Genesis of the French Canadian Nationalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article investigates the genesis of the French-Canadian nationalism in the Anglo-Canadian historiography. The essence of debate that arose among English-Canadian historians about the conquest of New France (Quebec) by Great Britain as one of the main causes of the French-Canadian problem is analyzed. In particular, as opposed to the pro-British point of view, which considers this conquest as a progress and benefit for the residents of French Canada, its opponents considered the issue as a tragedy for the French Canadians. Particularly the attention is drawn to the changes of the historiographical paradigm after the Second World War, when even pro-British historians had to reconsider their attitude to conquest Canada by Great Britain and recognize its consequences for the French Canadians. Special attention is paid to the reflection of the Anglo-Canadian historiography upon the uprising in 1837-1838 in Quebec on as one of the first manifestations of the radical French-Canadian nationalism. The basic approach in the Anglo-Canadian historiography about members of radical and liberal leaders of French-Canadian nationalism (H. Bourassa, L. Groulx, J. P Tardivel, H. Mercier), which contributed to the institutionalization and politicization of French-Canadian nationalism have been disclosed. The article also clarifies the position of the Anglo-Canadian historiography about the genesis of the “Quiet revolution” in Quebec as of the highest expression of French-Canadian nationalism.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".