DIFFERENCE OF GAZE: STUDY OF THEMATIC PATTERNS OF THE WRITINGS OF UMA PARAMESWARAN AND RUPI KAUR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada, the land of multiculturalism, is the land of greater diversities and the specter of vivid cultures and people from diverse roots who have made it their home. The entire cultural scenario of Canadian culture presents the multi faceted cultural fusions. Even etymologically, the term „Canada‟ itself has the roots in St. Lawrence Iroquoian word kanata which means „village‟ or „settlement‟. It is one of the world‟s most ethnically diverse and multicultural nations. Since the establishment of the European settlement by Samuel de Chaplain in 1603, Canada has remained a queer attraction and destination for the people of foreign lands all across the world for one or another reasons. Beginning with the French and English dominative influences, Canadian artistic and cultural pool has evolved its own unique artistic legacies through the fusion and co-existence of mosaic variety of different cultures of people who practiced their own traditions along with the impact of their life stories on the Canadian lands. The works of South Asian creative writers display a rich arena of diverse sensibilities. In the penning practices of some of them one finds a great attachment with their home land and the strong connect with the native milieu and the avid struggles in the land far from the home site finds clear expression. Such writings are critically branded as the Diaspora Writings. This paper tries to evaluate on the compare and contrast basis the thematic patterns of the two generations of Indian origin creative writers Uma Parameswaran and Rupi Kaur. The researcher finds a queer interest in weighing the ways both the female creative writers‟ unique style of dealing with their feministic approach in that the researcher finds clearly embossed the societal versus individual gaze. In particular, where the senior one tries to explore the foreign terrains with the strong attachments with the home land and her relations with the other members of society, the junior remains confided within individualistic one-to-one relations with a liberalistic vein from the male dominance.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".