A.6.P.WMR:10 - Rationale

Boundary words describe a relation position only relative to an exact object. Treating them as entity kinds or universal relations erases the exact predicate, current facts, and subject assertion that determine obtaining. The three-question ordinary method restores the thing, related object, and direct verb or stop first; two conditional assurance questions expose claim dimensions and the formal predicate definition only when those distinctions can change or check the answer.

Mint vs reuse. A.6.P.WMR introduces only this pattern id and its Tech and Plain labels; it mints no U-kind, relation kind, boundary-word family, result record, or work occurrence. The worked-case RelationKind tokens are explicitly assumed to have been published by named project relation-declaration epistemes; naming them in a case neither admits them into FPF nor republishes their declarations. It reuses each exact subject kind, direct relation, local A.6.RCD claim, and blocker under its own governor. Any durable name for a recovered entity, relation, or performed-work occurrence starts under F.18 only after this recovery closes.

The lightest truthful exit is preferred. A direct relation is cheaper than a local compound claim; a local claim is cheaper than reusable predicate semantics; an exact non-assertability result is more truthful than an invented universal relation. This economy preserves expressive project language while keeping occurrence identity and ontology growth demand-driven.