Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nineteenth-century French scholars collected oral songs and tales from “folk” communities as evidence of an unbroken French spirit that endured within a living heritage of medieval literatures. This process of collecting a premodern linguistic heritage in the form of poésies populaires unfolded according to instructions promulgated by Jean-Jacques Ampère on behalf of the Comité de la langue, de l’histoire, et des arts de la France, which convened in Paris from 1852 to 1857. Provincial correspondents gathered folk poésies from rural laborers and peasants in the provinces and sent them to the Comité’s primary inspectors, who determined their authenticity as specimens of French patrimony. These primary inspectors included some of the founding scholars of French medieval studies, such as Paulin Paris and Prosper Mérimée. Their conceptualization of “folk” communities as living vectors of medieval literatures is imprinted on the disciplinary structures that they founded, baked into the genealogy of the archive. Overseas French-speaking populations were also subject to this process of verbal extraction and temporalization. In Lower Canada, philologists, musicologists, and proto-ethnographers collected songs from First Nations and Acadian communities, which they assumed to preserve unevolved repertoires since contact. In coastal Louisiana, philologists gathered contes from creole-speaking freed people and translated medieval literatures, such as the Chanson de Roland and the fables of La Fontaine, into Louisiana creole; they analogized the “devolution” of creole from French to the process by which Old French derived from Latin, and sought in creole expressions a key to unlock new understandings of medieval French literatures. In the Antilles, French philologists produced orthographies of creoles as evidence of the simple, premodern civilizational status of their speakers and as a justification for progressive settler-colonial regimes. Other scholarship has outlined a model of critical philology that exposes these hierarchies and distortions in the construction of the archive of medieval French literatures and offers alternate grounds for historicization.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| 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".