Rhéteurs de basse-cour: le genre littéraire du caquet (XVle-XVlle siècles)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the XVIth and XVIIth centuries, more than twenty texts depicting the fictive conversations between women from low social extraction (fishwives, washerwomen, etc.) were published under the name of "caquet". This eclectic collection of texts can be divided into three subgroups, each formally and thematically distinct. The texts from the first group, published between 1530 and 1600, are versified and present many similarities with the "farcesque" production from the end of the XVth century. The texts from the second group, published during the first quarter of the XVIIth century are, for their part, written in prose, and use the same narrative frame : the daily meetings of bourgeois women at the bedside of one of their peers who is resting after childbirth. As for the last subgroup, it is consisted of a series of mazarinades in which female gossipers are reflecting on current political matters. Only the texts from the second subgroup – all gathered in the Recueil général des caquets de l'accouchée (1623) – have truly received attention from critics (mostly from a sociocritic perspective). The only article which offers a diachronic study of this corpus in order to define this literary genre also grants a much greater importance to the Recueil general, resulting in a biased reading of anterior and posterior "caquets", which are treated as either the prefiguration or the denaturation of this work (Gérin 1988). This thesis offers a new and more encompassing definition of this literary genre, focusing on its tendency to comment its own enunciative modalities. Indeed, metadiscursivity seems to be a prominent feature of this corpus, which negotiates the tension between the need for legibility and the misogynistic depiction of female loquacity, perceived as unintelligible.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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".