Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article examine la posture langagière dans le roman d’Afrique francophone à partir des polars de Janis Otsiemi et Mongo Beti. Il pose l’hypothèse que la posture langagière chez ces deux écrivains traduit une réalité sociale, complexifiée par la défense d’une identité nationale. Loin d’être seulement une langue argotique, elle est aussi la continuation d’une manière d’écrire dont les racines sont à rechercher dans la littérature policière des années 50. À l’instar du néo-polar français soixante-huitard, issu de la filiation du roman noir américain dont le type d’écriture violente et syncopée permet aux auteurs de critiquer avec virulence les travers sociaux, Janis Otsiemi et Mongo Beti proposent de nouvelles orientations thématiques et de nouvelles configurations de l’enquête, en tenant un discours à la fois critique et ironique sur les sociétés africaines. Chez eux, le polar est le lieu d’une inventivité linguistique dont l’écriture reprend les grandes articulations en termes de subversion.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".