Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the seventies, a new discourse on language emerged and built up in Quebec. While the "querelle du joual" was almost finished, feminists became more and more aware of their so-called "mother tongue"'s inherent sexism. Believing in determinist linguistic theories, the vast majority of them came to the conclusion that language was a symbolic system that rejected women and women's experience. While some American feminists were proposing an important reform of the language, in Quebec, a few women writers incorporated their preoccupations with language in their literary texts. These women dedicated themselves to intensive textual researches, with the intention of creating a new "women's language" that would override the patriarchal law ruling the symbolic order. The different works studied in this thesis have been chosen between those of the women most representative of feminist metalinguistic discourse in Quebec: L'Euguelionne (1976), by Louky Bersianik, L'Amer ou le chapitre effrite (1977), by Nicole Brossard, Une voix pour Odile (1978) by France Theoret and Lueur: roman archeologique (1979) by Madeleine Gagnon. The analysis of these texts will particularly be focused on the tensions building between discursive and formal aspects of each work. We'll see if and how the metalinguistic discourse, which we can find in the texts themselves and in more theoretic articles, is manifesting itself by a radical manipulation of the language at a formal level. The variety of ways some women writers of Quebec tried to inscribe feminine experience in language can be shown as a proof of the extreme difficulty of these textual practices, which elaborate themselves through what they are desperately trying to overcome.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".