Bibliographic record
Abstract
Devant la tche imposante de trouver une voie de sortie l'impossibilit du droit colonial de traduire et reconnatre une souverainet aux peuples autochtones, cet article propose quelques lments des thories du langage et de la traduction de Benjamin et Wittgenstein pour faire une critique interne au droit occidental.Au regard de ce rapprochement critique, cet article propose premirement d'laborer le constat d'une incapacit des institutions coloniales d'admettre des traductions juridiques d'autres formes de mythologies souveraines en Amrique du Nord.Deuximement, l'article cherchera observer un rapprochement dans la philosophie du langage de Benjamin et Wittgenstein par leur analyse de l'altrit culturelle et de sa traduction confronte au rapport dmiurgique des institutions coloniales leur mythologie souveraine.Enfin troisimement, nous imaginerons les mthodes possibles pour ouvrir un espace interstitiel au sein de la traduction juridique qui permettrait une ngociation diplomatique entre fondements linguistiques et culturels dits incommensurables.L'ide est ici d'laborer une piste de rponse pour renouveler l'approche au pluralisme au sein du contexte fdral du Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".