Z Polski do Kanady. Komunistyczna Polska i emigracja widziana oczami kanadyjskich pisarek urodzonych w Polsce
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian ethnic literature has been dominated by testimonies of migrant experience for a long time. Writers of Eastern European extraction, such as Janice Kulyk Keefer, Eva Hoffman, Eva Stachniak, Lisa Appignanesi or Elaine Kalman Naves to mention just a few, have contributed to the vast body of Canadian migrant literature, giving voice to the quandaries of white, invisible minority migration. As it turns out, the latest texts published by Polish-born Canadian women writers also address the issues of migration and the memory of Communist Poland, which the writers left in the 1980s and early 1990s. The aim of this paper is to look at three selected texts: Giant (2012) by Aga Maksimowska, Lemons (2017) by Kasia Jaronczyk and Was It Worth It. Columbus in Jeans (2019) by Liliana Arkuszewska, all of which are debut novels, and discuss their perception and rendition of Communist Poland, which the authors left behind physically and simultaneously struggled to free from mentally. The narratives chosen for this study, despite substantial differences, bear certain similarities in their treatment of Poland as well as become important commentaries on the status of migrant discourses in North America.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 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".