MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161993745 · doi:10.82308/24836

“‘Here at the Brink’: Don McKay’s edge poetics and the articulation of wilderness in Canadian poetry”

2018· dissertation· en· W7161993745 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Blythe Hutchcroft

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsESPACEPoeticsArticulation (sociology)Wilderness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le but de cette étude est d'interroger comment certains poètes anglais-canadiens ont abordé l'inconnaissabilité d'un sujet insaisissable dans le monde naturel, articulant paradoxalement l'indescriptible ou l’ineffable. Cette étude se concentre le plus explicitement sur les “edge poetics” du poète contemporain canadien Don McKay. En examinant l'œuvre de McKay pour des poèmes situés aux limites, aux seuils, et aux périphéries, cette recherche analyse comment la poésie de McKay problématise l'esprit toujours catégorisant, et comment elle remet en question notre perception de “l'autre.” Dessinant une ligne d'influence de la tradition dont McKay vient, cette étude examine d'abord l’histoire de poèmes naturels canadiens (1888-1966). En examinant cinq poèmes qui font face à ce qui est “inappellable” (Scott, “Height of Land”), le premier chapitre illustre comment cinq poètes anglais-canadiens (Lampman, D.C. Scott, Pratt, A.J.M. Smith, Atwood) se servent d’une poétique de “unknowing” pour résister l’articulation de l'autre non-humain qu’ils décrivent. Le deuxième chapitre étudie des parallèles entre Al Purdy et Don McKay. Les poèmes de Purdy créent de l’espace pour le “mysterium tremendum”—un concept qui est parallèle à la “wilderness” de McKay. Le troisième chapitre se concentre sur les “edges poetics” de McKay, révélant la manière dont ses poèmes font des gestes à un espace non linguistique. En terminant, je montre le potentiel éthique de cette pratique de “unknowing” de l’autre.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207