Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dès sa parution en 1731, et réédition en 1753, L’histoire de Manon Lescaut et du chevalier des Grieux devenait un texte de base dans l’imagination française. Le sujet de plusieurs grands commentaires, notamment de Sgard (1989), Singerman (1987), Hazard (1924), et Fort (1985), les débats qui entourent le roman soulignent les interprétations de la signification imbue par Prévost. Mais ces lectures chrétiennes-autobiographiques et féministes sont insuffisantes si nous voulons comprendre le personnage de Manon et sa voix telle qu’elle transparait sous la narration de des Grieux. Après la recherche de Ramond (2014), cet article vise à analyser l’intertexte entre Manon Lescaut et Iphigénie de Racine qui surgit de la parodie jouée par Manon et mal comprise par des Grieux ou en dissonance avec son récit. Nous catégoriserons les répliques créées par son jeu racinien avec son amant pour mieux comprendre les questions « Qui est Manon Lescaut ? » et « Quelle est sa voix ? »
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".