MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055542836

Ãcrire la « parlure » canadienne-française: la langue oralisée dans l'oeuvre d'Albert Laberge

2014· other· en· W7055542836 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2014
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubject (documents)Point (geometry)Interpretation (philosophy)Theme (computing)Identification (biology)Feature (linguistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work of Albert Laberge, an early 20th century French Canadian writer, has been the subject of numerous thematic studies. Considered as the first naturalist author in Quebec and as a representative of the “anti-terroir,” Laberge gained critics' attention with his dark sense of humor and cleverly laid out sordid stories. Despite the fact that critics recognize the value of Laberge's work, they feel uneasy about the way it is written. Laberge, like most of his contemporaries, introduces oralized language in his texts. However, as opposed to other writers of his time, he does not limit orality to dialogues; he also uses oralized language in the narrative voice of his texts, without using quotation marks or italics to signal the borrowing of terms from the popular register. This contact between normative and oralized languages was seen by critics as an indication that Laberge could not really master the language codes relevant to his profession and, as a result Laberge was identified as a minor author. The study of the introduction of oralized language in La Scouine and in Laberge's short stories indicates on the contrary that Laberge's stylistic work was constant and profound. The formal analysis of Laberge's writing shows that it works as a "récit oralisé," an oralized narrative (a concept developed by Jérôme Meizoz) and that it involves numerous hybrid constructions (a notion borrowed from Mikhail Bakhtin). This re-reading of Laberge's work from a formal and linguistic point of view places Laberge as one of the first Quebec writers of orality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.012
Scholarly communication0.0110.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.126
Teacher spread0.124 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicLaser Design and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207