L'écriture migrante au Québec: l'interculturalisme dans le discours littéraire et politique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Writers of various origins have always written in Quebec. Since 1987, they have been recognized and coined the term “migrant writers.” The emergence, designation and promotion of migrant writings echo the interculturalist political discourse advocating openness towards others and an integration of immigrants respectful of their cultural identity. In various official documents, the Quebec government has established a diversity management policy based upon contributions from cultural communities in Quebec and the promotion of positive attitudes towards immigration and cultural diversity. After some study of Quebecois literary anthologies published at Cegep level between 1994 and 2008, one recognizes that these pedagogical instruments support this official policy and present migrant writings as literature of immigrants whose primary interest remains the testimony of a “néo-québécoise” or a foreigner's reality. Recognition of the migrant literature highlights the political transformation of Quebec society via intercultural education and the development of social consensus with respect to pluralism. The literary and scholarly perspective on migrant writings can be well understood when it is related to the Quebec political view of immigration from which it borrows its words and values.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".