MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293136503 · doi:10.7202/1088911ar

La réécriture féministe et anticoloniale de l’histoire à partir du récit de soi dans Le crachat solaire (1975) de Jovette Marchessault

2021· article· fr· W4293136503 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Élise Couture‐Grondin

Bibliographic record

VenueArborescences Revue d études françaises · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le premier tome de la trilogie autobiographique de Jovette Marchessault, Le crachat solaire, raconte le voyage cosmique de la narratrice vers la terre, sa naissance, ainsi que ses voyages dans le ventre d’un autobus Greyhound à travers les Amériques à l’âge adulte qui la met en lien avec « la terre amérindienne ». Après un long périple, elle sent le besoin de revenir à Montréal, un récit de retour qui rejoint celui de sa chute sur terre dans l’enveloppe charnelle de son corps physique. Les deux récits qui s’entrecroisent offrent une vision alternative de l’histoire à travers un récit de soi, de sa famille, de ses ancêtres et d’un récit de création féministe. Unique, ce texte féministe paru en 1975 articule la domination patriarcale à la violence du colonialisme dans un effort d’offrir une version féministe et anticoloniale de l’histoire de Montréal, du Québec, et plus largement des Amériques. À partir de ma position comme féministe colonisatrice blanche, j’analyse comment le récit autobiographique de Marchessault pousse à une prise de conscience anticoloniale pour les féministes québécoises et encourage un regard critique sur l’histoire du colonialisme au Québec.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.024
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArborescences Revue d études françaisesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207