Le rap, une poésie de performances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considérer le rap dans le sillage croisé de la performance poétique et de la tradition orale simplifie immédiatement le lien entre études littéraires et cette forme littéraire contemporaine populaire. Cependant le rap, véritable art total, embrasse des problématiques liées à ses diverses modalités de performance – orale, rythmée, visuelle, sociale – mais aussi à l’histoire de la poésie en tant que création expérimentale et socioculturelle. Les contributions émanent de chercheurs et chercheuses internationaux (Belgique, Cameroun, États-Unis, Grande-Bretagne, France, Haïti, Québec, Sénégal) et le volume aborde des productions rappées francophones et anglophones selon une perspective à la fois globalisée et située. Partant du point de vue des études littéraires, il considère les dimensions rythmique, visuelle et sociopolitique de cette performance poétique plurimédiale. Considering rap as a poetic performance simplifies the relationship between literary studies and this popular contemporary poetic form. Nevertheless, rap, as a genuine Gesamtkunstwerk, raises issues rooted into its specific ways to perform itself – on an oral, rhythmic, visual, and social ground – and rooted in the history of poetry as an experimental and sociocultural creative production. The volume is composed of contributions from international researchers (Belgium, Cameroon, France, Haiti, Quebec, Senegal, United Kingdom, and United States of America) and encompasses francophone and anglophone rap productions both from a global and situated perspective. Starting from the literary studies point of view, the volume tackles the rhythmic, visual, and sociopolitical dimensions of this multimedia poetic performance.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".