The aboriginal woman's voice in canadian literature: Jeannette Armstrong and Beatrice Culleton
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is a critical analysis of four works by two aboriginal Canadian women with the broad objective of giving voice to aboriginal Canadian writers, Jeannette Armstrong and Beatrice Culleton. The four works are used as case studies of aboriginal Canadian literature. The study takes a keen look at how aboriginal writers portray aboriginal characters in their fiction as well as the way they define the relationship between aboriginal Canadians and the mainstream society in their writing, keeping in mind that they have been through the colonial experience. \nFemale writers would be most closely attuned to some of the themes discussed and the choice of female writers, therefore, enables us to tap into the feminine sensibility where sensitive and emotionally charged issues such as family ties and family break-ups, substance abuse and dependence, institutional discrimination, oppression and mass murder are concerned. The work, therefore, singles out traits peculiar to female characters in the narratives, which lead to a better understanding of the role of women in society. \nThis work is a critical analysis of the images of aboriginal Canadians in works of art. In order to do that effectively, however, it has been necessary to do an overview of Canadian literature in chronological order of date of publication. A wide variety of other works, hard copies as well as information posted online, has also been consulted. \nThe thesis is then organised into chapters. The first chapter is an introduction into the subject of the study, which also touches on the statement of the problem, justification, scope and limitations, definition of terms, literature review, theoretical framework, hypotheses and methodology. The second chapter is a synoptic view of Canadian literature by non-aboriginal writers from the earliest writing up to 1980. It provides the historical background of aboriginal Canadians. It also provides an outline of the social and economic relations between aboriginal Canadians, the mainstream society, and the world at large, as reflected in literature. This overview becomes the background against which I do a critical analysis of works by Armstrong and Culleton. It also contains much of the literature review [or this study. \nThe third chapter is dedicated to a critical analysis of Beatrice Culleton's Spirit of the White Bison and April Raintree. The fourth chapter presents a critical analysis of Jeannette Armstrong's Neekna and Chemai and Slash. The conclusion summarises the whole work, foregrounding the findings and making recommendations. A list of works cited, in alphabetical order, has been included after the fifth and last chapter. \nAmong the most significant of my findings IS that aboriginal writers have made a significant contribution to world literature written in English. Furthermore, they have replaced the image of a defeated self.-mocking aboriginal Canadian with a new proud and lively one, the face of a resilient and wise people. Through the efforts of these two female writers, the voice of the contemporary aboriginal woman is being heard, and Canadian literature is the richer for it. Further research in this area is desirable and recommended.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.054 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".