Stylistics of Zoocentrism in Contemporary French-Language Fictions : the Role of Analogy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette thèse étudie les déclinaisons stylistiques du zoocentrage dans un corpus littéraire de l’extrême contemporain (2007-2022) d’expression française (France et Québec), en choisissant pour observatoire l’analogie. Ce procédé peut tout à la fois instrumentaliser l’animal pour en faire un miroir de l’humain (dans la continuité des traditions anthropomorphisantes et allégorisantes) ou au contraire envisager l’humain comme un animal comme les autres. L’analogie est abordée comme un phénomène cognitif global aux manifestations formelles multiscalaires, de la figure (métaphore, comparaison, parallélisme) aux structurations macrostylistiques (mise en regard de séquences textuelles, effets de miroir) en passant par des phénomènes plus discrets (apposition, coordination, ambiguïtés référentielles). Il s’agit d’observer par quels procédés linguistiques et narratoriaux (structuration textuelle, désignation et caractérisation des personnages, recatégorisations discursives) la fiction littéraire contemporaine confère au sujet animal une position autonome et indépendante de la focale anthropocentrée, et comment l’analogie, dans cette perspective, tend à opérer une indistinction permettant de dépasser la traditionnelle dichotomie humains/animaux.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".