L'autothéorie minoritaire dans la littérature francophone contemporaine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Between theory and life lies a zone of incandescence where literature itself begins to think. This is where contemporary Francophone autotheory unfolds: a mode of writing in which the “I” becomes a tool for observing the world. Through the works of Dany Laferrière (Haiti–Montreal), Naomi Fontaine (Uashat, Quebec), Gabriel Osson (Toronto, Ontario), and Guy Gauthier (Saint-Boniface, Manitoba), this study shows how subjectivity—far from narcissism—operates as a form of knowledge rooted in the body, memory, and relation. These authors transform vulnerability into method, and detail into critical experience. In this sense, autotheory emerges as an embodied practice of thought, a way of grasping reality at the level of lived existence. Drawing on Meizoz, Paré, and Glissant, the article argues that these writers relocate theoretical reflection to the margins, where authorial posture becomes an act of connection. In dialogue with Fournier and Savard-Corbeil, it introduces the concept of minoritarian autotheory, understood as an epistemological practice of emancipation: writing from the peripheries to generate situated, sensory knowledge. In this light, literature becomes a cognitive and ethical space—thinking through rhythm, image, and silence. From the edges of language and culture, it reinvents how we inhabit the world and keeps alive the fragile promise of meaning.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".