"Votre tres humble & obeissante soeur et seruante" L'usage des conventions orthographiques nouvelles dans les éloges funèbres monastiques écrits par les Ursulines de France et de Nouvelle-France entre le XVIIe et le XIXe siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT\nIn France, the 17th century was a crucial period for the development of written French. New spelling rules were implemented but older ones were still in favor. When secular and religious elites established themselves in colonial Nouvelle France, (i.e., Canada and the United States), they brought in this set of old and more modern conventions.\nRare are the studies consecrated on hand-written French in the 17th century. Although a few researchers have looked at the literature produced by some famous French sisters, no one has ever studied their orthography. The originality of this dissertation arises from its protagonists—secluded religious women writing about women over two centuries—, but also from a rarely studied literary genre: monastic eulogies. Even though rhetorical genre is widely mentioned and studied in the Humanities, the monastic eulogy in itself, as written by the Ursulines in their annals, mortuary records and circular letters, remains to be understood. Indeed, each document presents a unique discursive structure, reflecting its complexity.\nThe main objective of my dissertation is the understanding of the evolution of written French within the religious world. To do so, I have decided to study twelve orthographic conventions in 618 monastic eulogies, all hand-written between the years of 1641 and 1835 by Ursulines in France, Quebec, and New Orleans. The French corpus is composed of 369 eulogies, written in 39 Ursulines convents between 1676 and 1792. This corpus is a solid starting point to my analysis as it helps me contextualize, and grasp, the orthographic tendencies in France at the time. 195 manuscripts were collected in Québec (1689–1800), while 54 are from New Orleans (1727–1835).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".