Whose Paris (and whose Montréal)?: Gail Scott en français et la littérature québécoise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'inclusion recente de textes de langue anglaise dans la litterature quebecoise doit beaucoup a l'œuvre de Gail Scott et a ses resonnances avec le corpus d'expression francaise. Trois romans de Scott sont parus a ce jour en traduction francaise, ce qui en a facilite l'inclusion. Publiees a une dizaine d'annees d'intervalle les unes des autres, par une traductrice et une maison d'edition chaque fois differentes, ces traductions usent de strategies opposees. La place qu'elles font au plurilinguisme, au francais quebecois et a l'experimentation stylistique suit des combinaisons changeantes. Par-dela la subjectivite des traductrices, ces differences s'elucident lorsqu'on les met en relation avec certaines tendances (et conceptions de la traduction) propres a la litterature franco-quebecoise au moment de la parution de chaque traduction. Si elles temoignent partiellement de l'evolution de l'œuvre scottienne, elles eclairent davantage celle de la litterature franco-quebecoise. Elles montrent aussi le role complementaire - et lacunaire - que chaque traduction existante joue dans l'apprehension de cette œuvre par le lectorat quebecois.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".