Questions in Literary Theory: Jean Bessière's Contribution to Comparatism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The words in epigraph are an example of an essential characteristic of Jean Bessiere's way of thinking, that of giving a central role to theory and to a type of thought which, in its development and in its practice, links Philosophy to Literature. It is therefore in the perspective of examining certain theoretical concepts applied to comparatist praxis that I wish to present his contribution to the understanding of Latin American diversity, which is the source for comparatism as it is practiced in this region. In an article published in Litterature comparee. Theorie et pratique (1998), (edited by Andre Lorant and Jean Bessiere and based on the Acts of the International Colloquium held at the University of Paris XII Val de Marne in 1993), I had the chance to reflect upon the conceptual and methodological changes in Comparative Literature in the second half of the century which has just ended, and to underline the contribution of theoretical discourse to traditional textual analysis, which was examined with regards to the appropriations on which its development feeds, or with regards to the borrowings which shape it. I attempted on this occasion to highlight the convergence and the complementarity of literary theory and comparative studies, such as they are described in those works, published in 1989, which are fundamental with
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".