Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The European travel narratives that follow the discovery of the New World have already been extensively studied, from historical, anthropological and literary perspectives. However, we would like to reread them from the perspective of the tension between a “marvellous possession” (Greenblatt 1991) and a more profound failure. The early travelogues show a complex discursive architecture with a textual subject facing an absolute Other, seeking to establish on the one hand an analogy based on a reassuring fictional intertextual horizon and on the other an exaggeration of otherness, symbolised by anthropophagy and monstrosity. If, as Todorov (1982) thinks, such an architecture was indispensable to the enterprise of conquest, it is nevertheless at the root of a triple failure. If the undeniable intercultural failure has already been widely studied, we will develop two others: the failure of the genre of the travelogue from the Middle Ages as an interpretative matrix, and, more profoundly, the failure of a Western knowledge paradigm, which will be shown in an exemplary way by the criticisms of las Casas and Montaigne.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".