E.10:9.7 - Guarded-head cross-reference (normative lexical caution)

When one wording head already carries several FPF-governed local interpretations, lexical cleanup should prefer a guarded-head note over silent flattening. The note may record that the head remains risky, name the cited texts or patterns that define or constrain the local interpretations, and point readers to the local canonical interpretation in each cited text.

If cleanup reveals that no admissible existing token can carry the needed meaning, use the local repair pattern for one-off wording. If the change needs one durable reusable name, first recover the value and its kind and record the applicable F.8 decision, then use F.18 for the NameCard and F.17 when public, Core-facing, durable, or cross-local publication is current. Do not invent an ad hoc synonym or let naming settle an unresolved object.

This cross-reference is lexical only. It does not create a new repair-side definition site, does not establish global or cross-local equivalence, and does not overrule cited local definitions. It simply keeps overloaded heads from being normalized into one false global interpretation.

projection is the main current example: A.16 keeps it as a move name for route-bounded partialization, while F.9.1 keeps it as a bridge stance label. E.10 therefore uses deconfliction notes and explicit naming of the cited text that governs each local interpretation, not one umbrella rewrite that erases the distinction.

Bare claim-bearing role is another guarded head and has no default Tech reading. Use E.10.ROLE to recover the current object or relation; use SystemRole only inside a concrete local system-role-kind designation after that kind is independently admitted.