Bibliographic record
Abstract
How can an untranslatable text be read as world literature? Gaston Miron’s only published collection of poetry, L’homme rapaillé, is of course a national, and even nationalist, work. While limited translations exist, their failure is inevitable to the extent that Miron’s language, beyond its fragmented syntax and play with prosody, abounds with neologisms and elements drawn from deep within the Québécois lexicon. In fact, the text is, in a sense, against translation as much in its form as in its content. Furthermore, one might expect that the collection’s overt political engagement and rootedness in the specific experiences and events of the Quiet Revolution would circumscribe the possibility of an extended readership. However, within the francophone world at least, L’homme rapaillé’s circulation and influence has far exceeded the borders of Quebec, in large part because its militancy and aesthetics eschew both provincialism and any facile conception of the universal. This article examines how the poetic construction of the “Québécanthrope,” precisely because of its concern for the local and the intimate, and its simultaneous lyrical dialogue with key figures of decolonization (Césaire, Depestre, Memmi, and Fanon, among others), becomes a gesture of worlding. The article argues for reading Miron as a theorist and practitioner of world literature, viewing Quebec through the lens of relation. I draw on the work of Emily Apter, Vilashini Cooppan, and Jacques Derrida to unpack the implications of Miron’s articulation of the local word and the world, focusing on his signed hapax, “ amironner.”
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".