The Articulation layer is really the heart and soul of
Instrumentation's humanitarian communication capabilities, because
everything else is just lists of entities and qualities (or things
and descriptions). Articulation assembles and animates
conversation.
Instrumentation attempts to avoid idiomatic confusion by only using words or conversational phrases that are unequivocal representations of universal relationships. These terms have been influenced by the "types of relations" defined by Gellish (Appendix A parts one through four), by the Resource Description Framework (RDF) and by the six "subdivisions of Universe" (Synergetics - 400.011) of R. Buckminster Fuller.
These charts will not be considered truly stable until they have been tested in many conversations in many different situations between many people who speak many different languages. I have tried to consider all aspects of physical, logistical, technical, mental, philosophical, personal, social, organizational and commercial discourse, but I'm sure I've missed something of vital importance to someone, somewhere, somehow.The Articulation layer always modifies the glyph of which it is a part. As an example, let us describe the following series (where A, B and C are any three objects).
A B C
"B inside .| A to the left of .| C to the right of."
#2428F7 .| #2582F7 .| #26A6F7
In this sentence fragment 'B' is the subject and we
are showing its position by describing the positions of 'A' and
'C'. We are not specifying that 'C' is necessarily to the right of
'A' (although this is true), because we are only
describing the subject. If we need to describe the relationship
between 'A' and 'C', we should do it in a separate sentence.
Instrumentation sentences should always be kept as
simple and clear as possible to facilitate communication with
people who speak different languages (or with computers, who are
magnificently stupid). If the example above were more complicated,
it would be better to break it into multiple sentences and avoid
any confusion.
The headings before the three tables below show the major Syntactic
divisions and the (unique) spoke combinations that define each
table's purpose. The four dark rows within each table separate the
four minor Syntactic divisions (the sub-categories or
sub-tables (or banks)) and contain the (repeating) spoke combinations that
define the meaning of each individual cell.
The sub-category names (such as Time, Class, Logic,
etc.) are primarily a synthetic distinction intended to aid users
in learning the locations of the terms. So, for example, there is
no reason to avoid using a 'Social' term in a situation that
actually deals with time or space. The 'Social' qualification
simply implies that the terms primarily relate to some aspect of
group dynamics. These 'Social groupings' need not have anything to
do with relationships between humans.
In practice, any Syntactic term can be used in any
situation where the meaning 'feels' appropriate. Mathematical and
Logical terms, however, do tend to have more precise meanings when
used rigorously as opposed to their casual usage in everyday
speech.
Within each cell below, the first set of words following the
index number are the words within the current vocabulary. Any
second set of words (after an asterisk) are new suggested terms.
Qualifiers create clauses that describe or organize one or more things. The relationship described is primarily static at the time of description, although the 'things' may be changing in other ways.
(a 'thing' might be a verb or a noun or something else,
depending on the situation, so the 'clause' may be adverbial,
adjectival, coordinate, subordinate, etc. without regard to any
English grammatical suffixes shown in the chart below)
To get here, you either read all of the Articulation terms above or skimmed and skipped to the bottom. In either case you haven't gone away yet, so we'll delve a bit deeper into the meanings of Extrapolation, Interpolation, Recognition and Recollection. The Articulation spokes were introduced on the page just before this section (page up once) in the design document.
The Yin spokes will have the greatest effect on a users ability
to memorize and select Articulation terms because they
differentiate individual terms within each of the banks. The
external (Yang) spokes are at least as important overall, but
their influence is diffused across an entire table or sub-table
because they operate at higher levels.
I'm not presenting a similar review of the Yang spokes because I think that anyone who expects to change the major Syntactic divisions or the sub-categories needs to demonstrate proficiency in the placement of individual terms first. After all, everything has to fit together in the end.
Interpolation is the act of examining something closely
with the intent of imposing a finer graduation or classification
upon it. This evaluation may usually be intended to drive some
dependent event, but it can also be a pure act of art, science or
philosophy.
Interpolation includes both classification and codification. Classification uses connections between data (from Recognition) to organize the relational structure of a data store. Codification uses existing data (from Recollection) to implement hierarchical indexing within a data store. Interpolation works within the boundaries of one event and usually evaluates multiple sub-events.
Recognition involves the identification of relationships,
both among the data sources maintained by Recollection and also
with new incoming data. Logically, Recollection must always
provide at least one data source, but this may be implicit or
ignored in a given Articulation vocabulary term. Recognition
identifies things that cross the boundaries of multiple events or
sub-events.
Recollection is the lowest (and therefore the foundation) of the Articulation spokes. It involves things that are already stored in memory. This implies that the events were either experienced personally in the past or can be located in some extant data store (such as the Internet, your home computer, etc.). Recalled things may not be real things, but they should be accessible for examination (unless they are stored inside your head, assuming insufficiently advanced technology). Recollection continually re-defines the boundaries of the events and sub-events under consideration.
Functionally: the term in the #00 cell of each sub-table
is filtered through all remaining fifteen combinations of the four
objects (or 'states') outlined above. This process changes the
term's meaning from the basic generic mode of the sub-category to
the ultimate expression of the relationship type.
As an example, in the Place sub-table, Cell #20 - "here"
evolves to cell #2F - "pervading" after the final interpretation
by all four Articulation Yin spokes.
The Articulation tables must contain the most common relationships used within all communication. Once a needed term has been identified, it should be placed into a sub-table in a location that strengthens that term's memorability and complements the surrounding terms.
The combinations of the spokes above should be the guiding
concern when placing Articulation terms within a sub-table, but
practical or situational considerations may also apply. For
example, Recollection often gets used to take up the slack when
Recognition has a matching term that's too good to pass up. It is
also occasionally useful to consider the absence of the above
types when trying to fit a term into the overall pattern.
When relationships or predicates from natural languages can be arranged to follow the consistent structures of Instrumentation's Articulation layer, a student should be able to master Instrumentation's Syntactic vocabulary with minimal rote memorization. Conversely, when Instrumentation's ontological hierarchy (or Syntactic patterns) subsume the existing structures within natural languages, situating useful relationships and predicates within Instrumentation's Syntactic vocabulary (should logically) become simpler. These complementary goals are the underlying focus of this web page.