La chanson polyphonique française de la renaissance ca 1470-ca 1550 : les avatars du populaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We show, by internal analysis of the texts and references to other contemporary texts, that from 1470 to 1550 the French polyphonic chanson reveals more than ever before a strong tendency to pertain to the "popular" and its related categories, the "carnavalesque" and the "grotesque". From a corpus of close to a thousand popular chansons selected according to the courtly and "good life" "registers", we can assert that, in spite of the essentially learned dimension of polyphonic music, it is the textual component that seems to be popular. This is what indicates the study of their carnavalesque images and the analysis of the grotesque structures of the "cris", the combinative chansons, the "caquets" and the "fricassees", the latter proving to be real crossroads where chansons of the time parade. Our theoretical reflections on the notion of "popular", necessary to justify the use of the concept in a corpus whose texts are usually anonymous, prompts us to both avoid source studies and issues of production and reception, by defining the "popular" as an aesthetic category based on stylistic and rhetorical conventions. In this perspective, the principal characteristic of these chansons consists in the omnipresence of the imperative calls to the participation in the "good life", all of which belong to a popular version of the carpe diem. While a type of carnavalesque chanson accumulates the motifs "dansons", "chansons" and "buvons", many constitute often obscene variants of "baisez-moi", and others multiply military orders. The occurrences of these imperative motifs, usually appearing in direct discourse, confirm, with partially imperative imprecations, a vocabulary of the public place, onomatopeia and plays on words, the orality of the register and its belonging to a popular level of discourse corresponding to a less elevated style than the low style of rhetoric.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".