Adichie’s <i>Americanah</i> , Transnational Border and the Prospects for Identity Reformation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The re-shaping of borders, triggered by globalization and many other trans-border historical events such as the fall of the Soviet Union, increase in connective technology, cyberspace interaction and global health challenges informed the growing multidisciplinary scholarship on borders that brought about the reassessment of the notion of border as more than physical demarcation. In the literary discipline, for instance, the re-imagining of border is called border poetics. Border poetics involves a critical analysis of the processes of bordering at the topographical, epistemological, symbolic, textual and temporal planes. It examines identity negotiation at the intersection of socially defined territories and foregrounds movements within and across territories in (and of) the literary text. Using the theoretical framework of border poetics, therefore, I examine Chimamanda Adichie’s Americanah as a transnational and a border narrative. By tracing the trajectory of racial border crossing, dwelling, and return by the migrant characters, I argue that Americanah involves multiple forms of bordering and border crossing. I also contend that racism is a barrier, similar to the actual border, that both separates and calls the migrant into constant mutation and negotiation of spaces.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".