L'ironie claudélienne dans «Partage de Midi» : le vers au service d'un amour conflictuel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This master's thesis aims to understand how Paul Claudel, in the writing and rewritings of Partage de Midi, tries at once to tell the story he lived, as well as integrate thoughts on his experience and his poetic conceptions on language and society. To do so, we look at the play from two perspectives: first, we analyze the first version, which corresponds to the first emotions of the poet towards the drama. Then, we examine the second and third rewritings, which come as a response to the first one. We demonstrate how language in Partage de Midi confirms the poetic evolution of Claudel. In order to grasp this process, the study focuses on two points: the dialogues of the rivals and of the lovers, and the stage directions. We also try to pull out examples of the presence of the author's voice within the play. Moreover, we draw a parallel between the analysis of Partage de Midi and Claudel's Art poétique, an important work in which he explains his visions of the world.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".