Le roman postcolonial francophone et la refondation des imaginaires : les voix / voies féminines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À l’instar de Kasereka Kavwahirehi, d’Achille Mbembe et d’Alain Mabanckou, les auteurs postcoloniaux soulignent depuis quelques années la nécessité de déconstruire et de dépasser les crises des sociétés africaines postcoloniales. Au niveau de la critique littéraire francophone, cela se traduit par des travaux qui s’intéressent aux moyens symboliques et /ou aux poétiques de la refonte des imaginaires. Toutefois, le rôle des femmes n’est pas encore suffisamment souligné, même si les personnages féminins sont parfois mis en exergue par les critiques. Dans cet article, je voudrais montrer que les voix féminines fortement au renouveau souhaité des sociétés africaines postcoloniales et que, par leurs paroles contestataires, elles donnent un souffle nouveau au projet réformateur desdites sociétés. Mots-clés : Voix /voies féminines - refondation des imaginaires – crises postcoloniales – auteurs postcoloniaux
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".