Scandale, blasphème, obscénité et plaisanterie. Entre transgression et acceptabilité de la transgression dans les discours religieux à Venise au XVII<sup>e</sup> siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette étude propose une réflexion sur le rapport des individus et des institutions avec la plaisanterie blasphématoire à Venise au XVII e siècle, c’est-à-dire dire avec les discours à la fois susceptibles de provoquer le rire et à la fois susceptibles de susciter l’indignation. À l’ère de la réforme tridentine, pourquoi et quand une plaisanterie à caractère religieux fait-elle rire ? Pourquoi et quand choque-t-elle ? L’étude des procès procès-verbaux produits par les tribunaux inquisitoriaux en fonction sur le territoire vénitien permet d’explorer la dimension transgressive, mais surtout le degré et les possibilités d’acceptabilité de ce type de discours religieux « scandaleux ».
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".