Intertextualité et porno Made in Québec : de la traduction à l’émergence d’un genre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À la croisée interdisciplinaire des études pornographiques et des études langagières, notamment la traductologie, la linguistique et l’analyse critique du discours, cet article propose de situer le genre pornographique québécois par rapport à son contexte sociohistorique d’émergence. Avec une approche historique et sociolinguistique, cette étude de cas documentera l’émergence de la pornographie québécoise en prenant comme point de départ le doublage au Québec de films pornographiques distribués avant ou en synchronie avec les premiers longs métrages québécois sous licence. En d’autres termes, en traçant l’histoire de la pornographie cinématographique au Québec depuis son émergence, cet article tâchera de répondre aux questions suivantes : le texte des longs métrages doublés en québécois contribue-t-il à la distinction d’une culture et d’une identité pornographiques québécoises ? De quelle manière la pornographie s’inscrit-elle dans la tradition plus large du cinéma québécois ?
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".