Amour courtois et fin'amor au XIIe et au XIIIe siècles : étude comparée de la poésie de Guillaume IX, de Jaufré Rudel, de Bernard de Ventadour et du Ghazal de Ibn Zeydoun
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The challenge of our research on fin'amor in this comparative perspective is to focus on the articulation between love, virtue and writing. In occitanian as in Andalusian poetry, indeed, we find that the poet dedicates his text to that which, by the very fact of this love and its dictates, guides his steps on the path of the noblest virtue. The poetic structure of the song as well as the arrangement of its themes make this love a pretext for writing which has no other end than itself. The inaccessibility of the Domna, essentially due to a characteristic absence, is the source of very intense feelings of lack and desire. Hence, the conflict remains insolvable between desire and the desire for desire, between love in reality and love of love. The love experience is staged in the courtly love song in a way that goes beyond 'the veracity' or 'the likelihood' of love. In terms of expression, for example, the poet, faced with the ban on naming his beloved, resorts to a constrained lexicon: the periphrasis and hyperbola, among others, allow him to escape this paradoxical situation to sing his love without revealing it, to describe his Domna without identifying it. Thus, prolix and jubilant, the language tries to compensate for the repercussions of distance. The pleasure of speech replaces sensual pleasure because it is through language and style that the poet creates what Riffaterre and Barthes designate as referential illusion and effect of reality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".