Master Art of Translation | The Temporal Anchor Fidelity System — How Tense, Aspect, Deadlines and Reference Time Keep Events in Order

How do you translate tense and aspect, time words, deadlines and event order without changing what happened? The safest approach is to identify the time of the event, the time from which it is described, and the speaker’s or document’s reference point before choosing target-language verbs or adverbs. A fluent translation of “had finished,” “has been working,” “will have finished,” “by Friday,” or “until Friday” can be factually wrong if it moves completion, duration, permission or sequence. First reconstruct the timeline; then choose the natural target-language expression that makes the same timeline available to the reader.

People searching for how to translate tense and aspect, time expressions in translation, how to translate by versus until, since versus for, past perfect translation, translation of deadlines and durations, or time-zone localization need more than a grammar chart. They need to know which event is earlier, whether it is finished or continuing, whether a statement is habitual or predictive, and which date a word such as “tomorrow” points to. This chapter provides a source-first time map, a repeatable revision workflow, failure diagnoses and original English-language semantic-control examples that can be applied to real language pairs with qualified reviewers.

The hidden problem is temporal-anchor drift: a sentence can preserve the topic and vocabulary while silently changing when an action starts, when it ends, whether it has happened yet, or what a deadline obliges somebody to do. Machine translation and human drafting can both miss cross-sentence reference time. A translated date may also become ambiguous when notation changes. We separate the linguistic task of interpreting tense, aspect and deictic time from the data-formatting task of expressing dates and clock times for an audience. This is a translation chapter, not a general lesson in English grammar, scheduling software or an assertion that every language divides time in the same way.

This is child EDKSG-TRANS-MASTER-WORLD-1500 in the world-facing Master Art of Translation | The Complete System for Moving Meaning Between Languages architecture. It follows the Rhetorical Pattern Transfer chapter without borrowing its owner. When the obstacle is word knowledge rather than the meaning of time across languages, visit the protected Vocabulary Learning Hub; when the obstacle is learning English tense as English rather than translating between systems, visit the protected How English Works. The examples below are original meaning-control tests, not unverified claims about exact word-for-word equivalence in a particular language pair.

Quick answer: seven decisions before you translate a time expression

• Locate the utterance time, document creation time and intended reading time; never treat them as automatically identical.
• Separate event time, reference time, duration, completion status, recurrence and future possibility.
• Write an explicit timeline in plain language before choosing a target verb form.
• Check whether “by,” “until,” “after,” “since,” “from,” “within,” “during” and “for” set different boundaries.
• Preserve the distinction between a plan, a prediction, a duty and a confirmed event.
• Keep numeric dates unambiguous, and do not convert time zones or calendars without the necessary data and authorization.
• Have a qualified second reader compare the source and target timelines, not only their surface fluency.

Table of contents

• Search intent and the hidden problem
• The temporal-anchor model
• Core translation mechanisms
• A repeatable translation workflow
• Original worked diagnostics
• Failure modes and their remedies
• Transfer workshops
• Four-week practice plan
• Glossary and verification questions
• References and next routes

What the reader is really trying to solve

Some searchers want to turn a single sentence into another language. Others are reviewing a contract-like notice, a scientific abstract, a user interface, a historical account, a short story, a policy announcement or a machine-generated draft. Their common problem is not merely which verb ending sounds natural. It is how to preserve the same claim about the time relationship among events. A translation may be completely idiomatic and still tell the audience that an inspection is finished when it remains open, that an option is available after its actual deadline, or that a habit is a single planned action.

A useful starting question is: what could the target reader wrongly do, infer, quote or remember if the time were shifted? A delayed shipment may be misunderstood as completed. A research finding may be described as continuing when the observation period ended. A historical witness may appear to know the future. A deadline can be translated into an availability window. These are different harm patterns, and they demand different checks. Treating all of them as a simple tense mistake misses the underlying meaning relationship.

This chapter therefore distinguishes translation accuracy from localization presentation. A source sentence can have a correct temporal interpretation before its date is displayed as words, numerals or an application timestamp. Conversely, a perfectly formatted date can accompany an inaccurate translation of “not before.” Formatting and interpreting are complementary but not interchangeable, so a review process needs separate evidence for each.

The main examples use plain English to expose meaning contrasts. In actual bilingual work, a translator must validate the source-language reading first, then check available target-language grammar and usage against that reading. English is merely a diagnostic metalanguage here: no single target language is presumed to represent tense or aspect with the same morphology, and some express relationships through particles, adverbs, context or discourse sequence.

The temporal-anchor model: make the hidden clock visible

1. Speech or assertion time

The point at which a speaker states a claim or a document asserts it. This establishes what “now,” “yesterday,” “next month,” or an unqualified present can be measured against. A quoted message keeps the original speaker’s anchor even when republished later. Do not substitute the translation date merely because it is the latest visible date. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

2. Event time

When the event itself occurs. A single event can have a start, middle and end. Establish what the original sentence actually claims about these boundaries. “The test ran” does not entail “the test passed,” and “the test was running” does not assert that it finished. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

3. Reference time

The temporal viewpoint from which the event is represented. Past perfect often orders one past event against a later past reference; a historical narrative may shift its reference time across paragraphs. A target form must preserve that ordering even when its grammar does not match the source form. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

4. Duration

How long a state or event lasts. “For two days” identifies length; “in two days” can identify a delay until an event in many contexts. Keep units, endpoint assumptions, and whether the duration is approximate or exact; do not infer a start date that the source never supplies. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

5. Aspect and phase

Whether an event is ongoing, habitual, beginning, repeating or completed. Two texts may refer to the same calendar day yet disagree about which phase is asserted. A result under review is not an approved result. A habit may be described with a present form without predicting a particular future instance. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

6. Order and overlap

Whether A occurs before B, after B, simultaneously with B or throughout B. Chronology matters in reports, narratives and instructions. “After the release was approved” requires approval to precede release; “after the release” reverses the dependency. Verify the arrows independently of chosen words. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

7. Bounds and inclusivity

Where an interval begins and ends, and whether an endpoint is included. Words like “until,” “through,” “before,” “by,” “from” and “no earlier than” have context-sensitive conventions. An apparent equivalent can shift a permissible time range. When operational consequences matter, clarify rather than guess endpoint inclusion. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

8. Modality about the future

Whether the future is a plan, promise, expectation, permission, requirement or prediction. “Expected to open” does not become “will open,” and “must be submitted” does not become “may be submitted.” Time claims and degrees of certainty are linked but should be checked separately so no new guarantee is invented. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

9. Calendar reference

Which month, year, week, era or calendar system a date actually names. Numeric ordering can vary, and short years can be underspecified. For source date “04/05,” confirm which number means month before transcribing it. Use a full written month or an unambiguous machine-readable canonical form when appropriate. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

10. Clock and zone

Which local time, offset, identifier and time-zone rule applies. A visible offset is not always equivalent to an enduring regional time-zone identifier. Changes to daylight-saving rules and recurring appointments require separate treatment. Translators should not invent an offset or present an unverified conversion as fact. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

11. Document lifecycle

When the sentence was originally written and whether the current copy is an archival quotation. A live instruction, an archived notice and a quotation of an earlier instruction may contain identical words but different temporal use. Preserve quotation status and add editorial context separately if the publication needs to make an old “tomorrow” comprehensible. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

12. Evidence versus inference

What the source proves versus what readers might assume. Language can leave an endpoint underspecified. The translator’s job is not to fill gaps with plausible detail. Mark unresolved dates, status claims or time-zone assumptions for query; a readable sentence is not permission to create evidence. The editorial control is to write the relevant temporal relationship in ordinary language, compare it with the source’s entailments, and ask what additional claim the target candidate would license. This is where a fluent formulation is either accepted, narrowed or returned for clarification.

A minimal event record can be written as six fields: statement anchor, event interval, reference interval, phase, order relation and epistemic status. A seventh field, publication context, catches quoted or recycled messages. You do not need formal notation in the final article: a small internal table reading “reported Wednesday / inspection began Tuesday / still open Wednesday / decision pending” may be enough to prevent a mistranslation.

The map is deliberately language-neutral. It does not decree that every language has a past, present and future tense, or that a target-language perfect form always corresponds to an English perfect. The structure is an interpretive record of what the original says, not a universal grammar pasted onto every language.

Core mechanisms: how translation moves time without moving meaning

1. Deictic anchoring

Function: Resolve words such as today, yesterday, now, tomorrow and next month against the speaker’s actual assertion time, not the day the translation is prepared. Translation risk: An archived announcement saying “tomorrow” can remain an archived quotation, while an explanatory label may separately name the historical date. Silently replacing the old anchor with the translator’s present is a content change. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

2. Anaphoric time

Function: Use the timeline established in earlier sentences when the text later says then, later, previously or that morning. Translation risk: The reference is internal to the narrative or report. A word-for-word replacement can point outward to the current reader instead of back to the earlier episode. Mark the antecedent event before drafting. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

3. Tense versus time

Function: Distinguish verbal tense from the actual calendar relation a clause asserts. Translation risk: Future events can be expressed without a future verb form; past forms may carry politeness, hypothetical force or narrative distance. Translate the intended temporal relation, not a superficial morphological label. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

4. Viewpoint aspect

Function: Identify whether the clause looks inside an ongoing event or views it as a bounded whole. Translation risk: A progress update cannot be declared finished just because the target prefers concise clauses. Preserve whether the source makes the endpoint visible, hidden or explicitly unresolved. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

5. Perfect and anteriority

Function: Determine what happened before the reference time and why that earlier completion matters. Translation risk: A later past event may supply the anchor for a past-perfect clause. If the target language can mark anteriority through context and an adverb rather than a parallel tense, verify that the reader still sees the order. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

6. Habituality

Function: Separate general practice from an event that will occur once. Translation risk: Habit descriptions in manuals, research and ordinary conversation may imply regular tendencies, not predictions. Do not introduce “will” or a single future date unless the source actually commits to one. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

7. Prospective status

Function: Keep forecasts, plans, schedules, requirements, commitments and confirmed actions distinct. Translation risk: The difference can be legally, commercially or practically important, but the general rule is semantic rather than legal advice: do not turn “expected” into “guaranteed” or “planned” into “completed.” A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

8. Inchoative and terminative phase

Function: Represent starting, stopping, resuming, pausing and ceasing as different phase transitions. Translation risk: “Stopped reviewing” and “finished reviewing” are not interchangeable; one may indicate abandonment, the other successful completion. Ask which transition is asserted before choosing a compact equivalent. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

9. Duration versus delay

Function: Distinguish “for three hours” from “in three hours” and “three hours later.” Translation risk: Duration spans an interval; delay places an event relative to a starting point. A translation that treats these as synonyms can create a false operating window. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

10. Deadline versus availability

Function: Distinguish “by the end of the week” from “until the end of the week.” Translation risk: A deadline constrains latest completion; availability describes a continuing state or permission. Reversing them can make readers act late or believe a service will remain active. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

11. Start boundary and persistence

Function: Differentiate “since Tuesday” from “from Tuesday” and “on Tuesday.” Translation risk: A since-construction often links a start point to a continuing relevance. A from-construction may establish a start without asserting persistence to the current time. Do not supply the missing endpoint. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

12. Endpoint and exclusivity

Function: Interpret before, through, until, no later than, after and no earlier than precisely. Translation risk: Some usages differ by document convention or the nature of the event. If inclusivity matters to an action, require a defined clock time or an authorized clarification rather than relying on conversational assumptions. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

13. Recurrence scope

Function: Preserve frequencies such as daily, every other week, monthly, each time and once. Translation risk: “Every two days” is not universally equivalent to “twice per week.” Calendar and interval-based repetition can drift apart. The event ledger should record both frequency and the cycle’s starting point. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

14. Simultaneity

Function: Keep while, during, throughout, as soon as and at the same time distinct. Translation risk: A task occurring at some point during an interval is not necessarily continuous throughout it. A short overlap is not a full-duration obligation. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

15. Conditional sequencing

Function: Track whether an event occurs only if another event occurs, and whether the ordering is a condition. Translation risk: “After approval” must not lose its approval requirement in an apparently smoother “after the meeting.” The translator must not silently make a conditional event unconditional. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

16. Retrospective reporting

Function: Keep the speaker’s old future inside quoted or reported speech. Translation risk: “She said the review would begin the next day” belongs to an earlier reporting frame. Rewriting it as “will begin tomorrow” may shift both speaker and date. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

17. Historical present

Function: Decide whether a narrative present is a deliberate storytelling technique rather than a claim of current events. Translation risk: A history, documentary script or dramatic narration may use present forms for vividness. Preserve narrative function without falsifying the fact that events happened earlier. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

18. Event granularity

Function: Distinguish an event’s start, milestone, interim update, approval, release and completion. Translation risk: An organization may finish drafting but not finish reviewing. Terms like “completed” need an object and a phase. Match the exact milestone that the source names. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

19. Document revision anchoring

Function: Connect “this version,” “since the last revision,” and “previously” to the correct revision or release history. Translation risk: A translator reading the newest file may accidentally make an older note sound current. A revision log, not general intuition, determines the right anchor. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

20. Timezone semantics

Function: Separate an instant, a displayed clock time, an offset and a time-zone rule. Translation risk: Do not shift an appointment merely by translating a label. For recurring events, a fixed offset may not reflect all future local clock changes. Keep the original data and flag conversion needs. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

21. Ambiguous numeric dates

Function: Disambiguate short-form dates before reformatting them. Translation risk: The characters in 04/05/2026 can be interpreted differently under different conventions. A translator should confirm the source system or use an unambiguous spelling; guessing is not localization. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

22. Negation and temporal scope

Function: Read exactly which period or transition is negated. Translation risk: “Not yet authorized” differs from “never authorized.” “No longer pending” need not mean “approved.” Preserve the status distinction and any specified timing. A practical review identifies the assertion time, the relevant event and the possible mistaken inference before selecting a target construction. The aim is not grammatical mimicry; it is a target sentence whose reader can rebuild the same timeline and the same degree of commitment.

The 24-pass temporal translation workflow

Pass 1: Read beyond the sentence

Inspect the surrounding paragraph, headers, message thread and date of issue. Single-sentence translation can hide the actual temporal antecedent. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 2: Identify the genre

Mark whether the text is a live instruction, historical quotation, fiction, scholarly report, interface notification or meeting note. Genre changes the expected role of tense and deictic words. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 3: State the user task

Describe what a reader needs to know or do. A deadline warning and a literary flashback are both temporal, but require different QA priorities. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 4: Capture source dates

Write down explicit calendar dates without changing their formatting. Preserve the untouched original for audit. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 5: Find the statement anchor

Note when and by whom the claim was issued. A dated memo is not automatically a live instruction on the translation date. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 6: Identify each event

Use one row per action or state; distinguish the review, approval, release and notification as separate events. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 7: Mark begin and end

For each event, ask what the text commits to about start, duration and completion. Record unknown boundaries explicitly. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 8: Mark reference-time shifts

Watch for flashbacks, quoted speech, narrative perspective and reported events. The central clock can move without a visible calendar date. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 9: Mark aspect

Label each predicate as ongoing, completed, habitual, prospective or unspecified when supported by the source. Do not force categories the language does not encode. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 10: Mark recurrence

Clarify whether a practice happens every interval, regularly but vaguely, or exactly once. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 11: Mark time connectives

Highlight before, after, since, until, by, within, during, through, at least, no later than and similar operators. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 12: Mark modal force

Distinguish must, may, might, plans to, expects to and is scheduled to. Note what is uncertain or conditional. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 13: Draw the timeline

Write A precedes B, A overlaps B, or B remains unfinished at reference R. If the source is ambiguous, draw more than one possible reading. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 14: Choose target construction

Draft a natural expression using the target language’s own grammatical resources. Do not copy English tense charts as a universal template. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 15: Test a plain back-paraphrase

Ask a second person to describe the target’s timeline in simple words without looking at the source. Compare that interpretation with the source event map. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 16: Run endpoint questions

Ask whether the last permissible day is included and whether the beginning is fixed. Request clarification if the answer changes what a reader may do. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 17: Check date formats

Use a written month or a clear technical format where numeric order is ambiguous. Keep machine-readable and displayed forms distinct. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 18: Check zones and offsets

Confirm whether the source specifies a time zone, whether a conversion was requested, and whether the rule applies on the target date. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 19: Check tense consistency

Scan neighboring clauses for unexplained shifts that create additional events, erase uncertainty or collapse prior time into current time. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 20: Check quotations

Keep deictic language inside an old quotation attached to its original narrator. Put editor clarification outside the quotation if necessary. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 21: Check domain terminology

Verify whether “closed,” “cleared,” “released” or “completed” refers to a technical phase, not merely a general-language synonym. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 22: Classify residual risk

Flag unresolved points, distinguish high-impact timing errors from harmless stylistic alternatives, and assign clarification ownership. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 23: Revise independently

For consequential content, arrange competent bilingual revision that compares the entire source and target rather than reviewing target fluency alone. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Pass 24: Archive decisions

Retain the approved source, final text, timeline notes, date-format decisions, reviewer queries and any accepted ambiguity for subsequent revisions. The practical deliverable for this pass is a short annotation or documented decision that another reviewer can reconstruct.

Worked diagnostics: original source controls and unsafe shifts

Each worked diagnostic below is a miniature English semantic-control exercise. The “source-control wording” describes an intended source meaning in English; the “unsafe reading” is a deliberately wrong paraphrase, not a published translation; and the “controlled reading” records what a target translation must preserve. Translators working in a real language pair should compare actual source and target texts and confirm any unresolved convention. We use multiple types of text because temporal distortion is not confined to novels or grammar exercises.

Diagnostic family 1: Today anchored to source issuance

The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. Family-level diagnostic: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 01.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team expects to release the calibration report today.” Unsafe reading: “The research team expects to release the calibration report today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original research summary, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager expects to activate the update today.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager expects to activate the update today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original release notice, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in software product release: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator expects to return the manuscript to display today.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator expects to return the manuscript to display today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original collection note, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator expects to dispatch the consignment today.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator expects to dispatch the consignment today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original shipment update, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor expects to publish the corrected edition today.” Unsafe reading: “The editor expects to publish the corrected edition today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original publication announcement, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator expects to issue the assessment results today.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator expects to issue the assessment results today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original course bulletin, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead expects to reopen the equipment today.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead expects to reopen the equipment today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original maintenance notice, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist expects to restore account access today.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist expects to restore account access today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original support message, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer expects to publish the revised guidance today.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer expects to publish the revised guidance today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original information bulletin, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in public information update: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 01.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator expects to deliver the approved translation today.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator expects to deliver the approved translation today, meaning the day this translation is read.” Controlled meaning: “Today” remains the day of the original translation delivery note, not necessarily the reader’s current day.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: The sentence contains a deictic pointer, not a free-standing calendar date. An interpreter must recover the original statement date before expanding it. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Ask which exact day the author meant and whether the text is an archived quotation or a current notice. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 2: Tomorrow in a carried-forward note

Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. Family-level diagnostic: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 02.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team wrote on 14 October: “We will release the calibration report tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The research team will release the calibration report tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager wrote on 14 October: “We will activate the update tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The release manager will activate the update tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in software product release: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator wrote on 14 October: “We will return the manuscript to display tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The conservator will return the manuscript to display tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator wrote on 14 October: “We will dispatch the consignment tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator will dispatch the consignment tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor wrote on 14 October: “We will publish the corrected edition tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The editor will publish the corrected edition tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator wrote on 14 October: “We will issue the assessment results tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator will issue the assessment results tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead wrote on 14 October: “We will reopen the equipment tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead will reopen the equipment tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist wrote on 14 October: “We will restore account access tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist will restore account access tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer wrote on 14 October: “We will publish the revised guidance tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer will publish the revised guidance tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in public information update: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 02.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator wrote on 14 October: “We will deliver the approved translation tomorrow.”” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator will deliver the approved translation tomorrow relative to the current reader.” Controlled meaning: The quoted prediction points to 15 October in the note’s original frame; later publication must not reset it.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: Reported language retains its own historical point of view. Reprinting it on another date does not turn a quotation into a new promise. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Read the document date and the quotation marks before replacing any relative day word. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 3: Yesterday and historical distance

The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. Family-level diagnostic: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 03.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the calibration review ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the calibration review ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the release test ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the release test ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in software product release: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the conservation review ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the conservation review ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the dispatch inspection ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the dispatch inspection ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the editorial review ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the editorial review ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the moderation meeting ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the moderation meeting ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the safety inspection ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the safety inspection ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the identity check ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the identity check ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the public review ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the public review ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in public information update: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 03.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The dated report says the bilingual revision ended yesterday.” Unsafe reading: “the bilingual revision ended on the calendar day before the translated page was uploaded.” Controlled meaning: The intended day is one day before the report’s own date, which must be established from its metadata.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: The apparent convenience of the translator’s current calendar is the trap. Historic reporting uses the author’s temporal horizon. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Find the dated primary source; do not back-calculate from the server’s modified timestamp. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 4: Past completion before later past reference

The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. Family-level diagnostic: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 04.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team had finished reviewing the calibration report before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The research team finished reviewing the calibration report after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager had finished testing the update before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager finished testing the update after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in software product release: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator had finished inspecting the manuscript before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator finished inspecting the manuscript after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator had finished checking the consignment before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator finished checking the consignment after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor had finished proofreading the corrected edition before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The editor finished proofreading the corrected edition after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator had finished moderating the assessment results before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator finished moderating the assessment results after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead had finished inspecting the equipment before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead finished inspecting the equipment after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist had finished verifying account access before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist finished verifying account access after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer had finished checking the revised guidance before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer finished checking the revised guidance after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in public information update: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 04.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator had finished revising the translation before the approval meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator finished revising the translation after the approval meeting.” Controlled meaning: The review was already finished when the later approval meeting took place.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: The order relation, not just pastness, is essential. A target construction with adverbs may be acceptable if it keeps earlier completion unambiguous. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Draw two event boxes and check that the review’s endpoint precedes the meeting’s start. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 5: Still continuing at reference time

Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. Family-level diagnostic: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 05.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team is still reviewing the calibration report.” Unsafe reading: “The research team has finished reviewing the calibration report.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager is still testing the update.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager has finished testing the update.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in software product release: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator is still inspecting the manuscript.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator has finished inspecting the manuscript.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator is still checking the consignment.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator has finished checking the consignment.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor is still proofreading the corrected edition.” Unsafe reading: “The editor has finished proofreading the corrected edition.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator is still moderating the assessment results.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator has finished moderating the assessment results.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead is still inspecting the equipment.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead has finished inspecting the equipment.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist is still verifying account access.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist has finished verifying account access.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer is still checking the revised guidance.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer has finished checking the revised guidance.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in public information update: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 05.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator is still revising the translation.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator has finished revising the translation.” Controlled meaning: At the asserted reference time, the activity continues and completion is not established.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: Progressive status is an operational distinction, particularly when downstream readers rely on a completion flag. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Ask whether a competent reader would conclude the work may be released immediately. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 6: Habit as a general pattern

Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. Family-level diagnostic: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 06.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team normally completes the calibration review before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The research team will complete the calibration review before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager normally completes the release test before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager will complete the release test before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in software product release: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator normally completes the conservation review before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator will complete the conservation review before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator normally completes the dispatch inspection before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator will complete the dispatch inspection before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor normally completes the editorial review before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The editor will complete the editorial review before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator normally completes the moderation meeting before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator will complete the moderation meeting before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead normally completes the safety inspection before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead will complete the safety inspection before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist normally completes the identity check before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist will complete the identity check before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer normally completes the public review before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer will complete the public review before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in public information update: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 06.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator normally completes the bilingual revision before a release.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator will complete the bilingual revision before the next release as a confirmed forecast.” Controlled meaning: The statement describes a customary practice, without independently promising a particular future outcome.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: Habitual expressions need not entail a scheduled next occurrence. A fluent prediction can assert more evidence than the source supplies. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Separate a general procedure from evidence that the next individual procedure is actually booked. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 7: Plan versus accomplished event

The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. Family-level diagnostic: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 07.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team plans to release the calibration report on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The research team release the calibration report on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager plans to activate the update on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager activate the update on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in software product release: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator plans to return the manuscript to display on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator return the manuscript to display on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator plans to dispatch the consignment on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator dispatch the consignment on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor plans to publish the corrected edition on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The editor publish the corrected edition on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator plans to issue the assessment results on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator issue the assessment results on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead plans to reopen the equipment on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead reopen the equipment on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist plans to restore account access on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist restore account access on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer plans to publish the revised guidance on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer publish the revised guidance on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in public information update: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 07.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator plans to deliver the approved translation on Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator deliver the approved translation on Friday and the action is already confirmed complete.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a prospective planned time, not proof that the action occurred.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: The time coordinate alone is insufficient: project status and epistemic commitment must travel with it. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Ask whether the text describes intent, a booking, an obligation, an expectation or a confirmed outcome. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 8: Deadline by versus continuation until

“By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. Family-level diagnostic: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 08.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team must release the calibration report by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The research team may continue to release the calibration report until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager must activate the update by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager may continue to activate the update until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in software product release: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator must return the manuscript to display by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator may continue to return the manuscript to display until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator must dispatch the consignment by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator may continue to dispatch the consignment until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor must publish the corrected edition by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The editor may continue to publish the corrected edition until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator must issue the assessment results by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator may continue to issue the assessment results until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead must reopen the equipment by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead may continue to reopen the equipment until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist must restore account access by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist may continue to restore account access until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer must publish the revised guidance by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer may continue to publish the revised guidance until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in public information update: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 08.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator must deliver the approved translation by Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator may continue to deliver the approved translation until some point after Friday.” Controlled meaning: Friday establishes the latest allowed completion under the notice’s stated deadline convention.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: “By” constrains an endpoint for completing the task; it does not declare how long a permission remains available. Endpoint precision may require an exact time. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Write “what must already be done?” and “what remains permitted?” as two separate questions. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 9: Availability until versus deadline by

A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. Family-level diagnostic: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 09.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The option to release the calibration report remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The research team is required to release the calibration report no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The option to activate the update remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager is required to activate the update no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in software product release: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The option to return the manuscript to display remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator is required to return the manuscript to display no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The option to dispatch the consignment remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator is required to dispatch the consignment no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The option to publish the corrected edition remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The editor is required to publish the corrected edition no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The option to issue the assessment results remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator is required to issue the assessment results no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The option to reopen the equipment remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead is required to reopen the equipment no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The option to restore account access remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist is required to restore account access no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The option to publish the revised guidance remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer is required to publish the revised guidance no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in public information update: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 09.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The option to deliver the approved translation remains available until Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator is required to deliver the approved translation no later than Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source describes an availability window, not a duty to act.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: A permission or capability that expires is not necessarily a command. Translation must preserve the difference between a closing window and an obligation. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Check whether the original contains any imperative, duty marker or consequence for not acting. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 10: Within three days versus after three days

“Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. Family-level diagnostic: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 10.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team must release the calibration report within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The research team must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager must activate the update within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in software product release: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator must return the manuscript to display within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator must dispatch the consignment within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor must publish the corrected edition within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The editor must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator must issue the assessment results within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead must reopen the equipment within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist must restore account access within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer must publish the revised guidance within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in public information update: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 10.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator must deliver the approved translation within three days of approval.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator must wait three days after approval before acting.” Controlled meaning: A bounded period begins with approval, and the task must occur inside that window.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: “Within” marks a permitted elapsed-time interval; “after” can mark the point following its end. Reversing them creates the opposite instruction. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Set approval to time zero and locate the earliest and latest permitted moments. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 11: For three days versus in three days

Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. Family-level diagnostic: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 11.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team has been reviewing the calibration report for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The research team will begin reviewing the calibration report three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager has been testing the update for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager will begin testing the update three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in software product release: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator has been inspecting the manuscript for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator will begin inspecting the manuscript three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator has been checking the consignment for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator will begin checking the consignment three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor has been proofreading the corrected edition for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The editor will begin proofreading the corrected edition three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator has been moderating the assessment results for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator will begin moderating the assessment results three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead has been inspecting the equipment for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead will begin inspecting the equipment three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist has been verifying account access for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist will begin verifying account access three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer has been checking the revised guidance for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer will begin checking the revised guidance three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in public information update: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 11.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator has been revising the translation for three days.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator will begin revising the translation three days from now.” Controlled meaning: The source gives an elapsed duration of activity continuing to the reference point.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: Duration is not a countdown. Some languages encode time without a morphologically similar perfect-progressive form, but the interval must remain. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Ask whether the activity is already under way or has not started. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 12: Since Tuesday with current relevance

A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. Family-level diagnostic: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 12.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team has been reviewing the calibration report since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The research team performed reviewing the calibration report only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager has been testing the update since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager performed testing the update only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in software product release: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator has been inspecting the manuscript since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator performed inspecting the manuscript only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator has been checking the consignment since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator performed checking the consignment only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor has been proofreading the corrected edition since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The editor performed proofreading the corrected edition only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator has been moderating the assessment results since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator performed moderating the assessment results only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead has been inspecting the equipment since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead performed inspecting the equipment only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist has been verifying account access since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist performed verifying account access only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer has been checking the revised guidance since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer performed checking the revised guidance only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in public information update: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 12.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator has been revising the translation since Tuesday.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator performed revising the translation only on Tuesday.” Controlled meaning: Tuesday is the start of a period relevant through the asserted reference time.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: A starting point plus continuing relevance cannot be reduced to one completed day. The target may use context, adverbs or aspect markers to show the relation. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Find the textual evidence for the endpoint, not just the initial day. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 13: Already versus not yet

“Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. Family-level diagnostic: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 13.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team has already completed the calibration review.” Unsafe reading: “the calibration review is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager has already completed the release test.” Unsafe reading: “the release test is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in software product release: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator has already completed the conservation review.” Unsafe reading: “the conservation review is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator has already completed the dispatch inspection.” Unsafe reading: “the dispatch inspection is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor has already completed the editorial review.” Unsafe reading: “the editorial review is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator has already completed the moderation meeting.” Unsafe reading: “the moderation meeting is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead has already completed the safety inspection.” Unsafe reading: “the safety inspection is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist has already completed the identity check.” Unsafe reading: “the identity check is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer has already completed the public review.” Unsafe reading: “the public review is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in public information update: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 13.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator has already completed the bilingual revision.” Unsafe reading: “the bilingual revision is still pending.” Controlled meaning: Completion precedes the expected or relevant reference point.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: “Already” places an event in a relationship to expectation. Negating it or replacing it with “not yet” reverses the live status. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Ask whether the next reader should act as though the milestone is complete. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 14: Not yet versus never

“Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. Family-level diagnostic: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 14.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team has not yet released the calibration report.” Unsafe reading: “The research team will never release the calibration report.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager has not yet activated the update.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager will never activate the update.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in software product release: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator has not yet returned the manuscript to display.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator will never return the manuscript to display.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator has not yet dispatched the consignment.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator will never dispatch the consignment.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor has not yet published the corrected edition.” Unsafe reading: “The editor will never publish the corrected edition.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator has not yet issued the assessment results.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator will never issue the assessment results.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead has not yet reopened the equipment.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead will never reopen the equipment.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist has not yet restored account access.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist will never restore account access.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer has not yet published the revised guidance.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer will never publish the revised guidance.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in public information update: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 14.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator has not yet delivered the approved translation.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator will never deliver the approved translation.” Controlled meaning: At the reference time the action remains undone; future impossibility has not been claimed.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: “Not yet” leaves open later completion. “Never” asserts a much stronger time-spanning negation. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Check whether later completion remains a permitted interpretation of the source. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 15: Before versus after as the controlling sequence

Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. Family-level diagnostic: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 15.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the calibration review.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the calibration review.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the release test.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the release test.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in software product release: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the conservation review.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the conservation review.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the dispatch inspection.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the dispatch inspection.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the editorial review.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the editorial review.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the moderation meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the moderation meeting.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the safety inspection.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the safety inspection.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the identity check.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the identity check.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the public review.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the public review.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in public information update: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 15.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The decision was recorded before the bilingual revision.” Unsafe reading: “The decision was recorded after the bilingual revision.” Controlled meaning: The decision precedes the named event; the relationship is directional.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: Short prepositions can carry the entire logic of a procedure. A source-to-target order diagram is more reliable than judging fluency. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Draw decision → event; reject any candidate that makes the arrow point the other way. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 16: During versus throughout

Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. Family-level diagnostic: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 16.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team checked the calibration report during the calibration review.” Unsafe reading: “The research team checked the calibration report continuously throughout the calibration review.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager checked the update during the release test.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager checked the update continuously throughout the release test.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in software product release: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator checked the manuscript during the conservation review.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator checked the manuscript continuously throughout the conservation review.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator checked the consignment during the dispatch inspection.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator checked the consignment continuously throughout the dispatch inspection.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor checked the corrected edition during the editorial review.” Unsafe reading: “The editor checked the corrected edition continuously throughout the editorial review.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator checked the assessment results during the moderation meeting.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator checked the assessment results continuously throughout the moderation meeting.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead checked the equipment during the safety inspection.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead checked the equipment continuously throughout the safety inspection.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist checked account access during the identity check.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist checked account access continuously throughout the identity check.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer checked the revised guidance during the public review.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer checked the revised guidance continuously throughout the public review.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in public information update: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 16.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator checked the approved translation during the bilingual revision.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator checked the approved translation continuously throughout the bilingual revision.” Controlled meaning: The check happened at some point in the event’s interval; uninterrupted activity is not asserted.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: Occurrence inside a period does not entail coverage of every moment. Full-span readings can add an unsupported quality claim. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Ask whether a ten-minute check during a two-hour review still satisfies the source. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 17: Once versus recurring cycle

A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. Family-level diagnostic: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 17.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team is to release the calibration report once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The research team is to release the calibration report after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager is to activate the update once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager is to activate the update after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in software product release: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator is to return the manuscript to display once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator is to return the manuscript to display after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator is to dispatch the consignment once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator is to dispatch the consignment after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor is to publish the corrected edition once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The editor is to publish the corrected edition after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator is to issue the assessment results once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator is to issue the assessment results after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead is to reopen the equipment once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead is to reopen the equipment after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist is to restore account access once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist is to restore account access after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer is to publish the revised guidance once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer is to publish the revised guidance after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in public information update: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 17.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator is to deliver the approved translation once after approval.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator is to deliver the approved translation after every approval indefinitely.” Controlled meaning: The source specifies a single occurrence linked to the relevant approval.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: A recurrence marker changes both cost and obligation. The translator should record the quantifier’s scope, not merely the verb. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Count how many occurrences the original requires when the approval step repeats. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 18: Every two days versus twice weekly

Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. Family-level diagnostic: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 18.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team checks the calibration report every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The research team checks the calibration report exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager checks the update every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager checks the update exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in software product release: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator checks the manuscript every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator checks the manuscript exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator checks the consignment every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator checks the consignment exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor checks the corrected edition every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The editor checks the corrected edition exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator checks the assessment results every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator checks the assessment results exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead checks the equipment every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead checks the equipment exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist checks account access every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist checks account access exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer checks the revised guidance every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer checks the revised guidance exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in public information update: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 18.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator checks the approved translation every two days.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator checks the approved translation exactly twice each calendar week.” Controlled meaning: The intended interval-based cadence is two days between checks unless the specification says otherwise.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: Calendar weeks and rolling intervals are not mathematically equivalent schedules. A seemingly friendly paraphrase can alter frequency. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Simulate a sequence across a week boundary and compare the actual check dates. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 19: No earlier than versus no later than

This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. Family-level diagnostic: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 19.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research team may release the calibration report no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The research team must release the calibration report by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release manager may activate the update no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The release manager must activate the update by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in software product release: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The conservator may return the manuscript to display no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The conservator must return the manuscript to display by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The dispatch coordinator may dispatch the consignment no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The dispatch coordinator must dispatch the consignment by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The editor may publish the corrected edition no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The editor must publish the corrected edition by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course coordinator may issue the assessment results no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The course coordinator must issue the assessment results by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance lead may reopen the equipment no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The maintenance lead must reopen the equipment by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support specialist may restore account access no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The support specialist must restore account access by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The communications officer may publish the revised guidance no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The communications officer must publish the revised guidance by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in public information update: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 19.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation coordinator may deliver the approved translation no earlier than Friday.” Unsafe reading: “The translation coordinator must deliver the approved translation by Friday at the latest.” Controlled meaning: Friday is a lower boundary for permission, not an upper completion deadline.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: This is a polarity inversion of the permitted interval. In operational instructions it is a high-severity content error even if all dates are copied correctly. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Write the interval as before-Friday forbidden versus after-Friday permitted, then test the candidate. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 20: Scheduled versus predicted

A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. Family-level diagnostic: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 20.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “the calibration review is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the calibration review will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “the release test is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the release test will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in software product release: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “the conservation review is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the conservation review will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “the dispatch inspection is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the dispatch inspection will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “the editorial review is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the editorial review will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “the moderation meeting is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the moderation meeting will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “the safety inspection is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the safety inspection will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “the identity check is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the identity check will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “the public review is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the public review will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in public information update: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 20.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “the bilingual revision is scheduled for Friday.” Unsafe reading: “the bilingual revision will certainly be completed by Friday.” Controlled meaning: The source reports a schedule, not a guarantee that the event occurs or finishes as planned.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: A schedule expresses planning state. It does not entail performance, success or final approval. Preserve the event verb and the epistemic qualifier. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Separate the calendar booking record from evidence that the milestone happened. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 21: Past report of future event

This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. Family-level diagnostic: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 21.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the research team said the team would release the calibration report on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will release the calibration report tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the release manager said the team would activate the update on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will activate the update tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in software product release: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the conservator said the team would return the manuscript to display on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will return the manuscript to display tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the dispatch coordinator said the team would dispatch the consignment on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will dispatch the consignment tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the editor said the team would publish the corrected edition on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will publish the corrected edition tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the course coordinator said the team would issue the assessment results on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will issue the assessment results tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the maintenance lead said the team would reopen the equipment on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will reopen the equipment tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the support specialist said the team would restore account access on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will restore account access tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the communications officer said the team would publish the revised guidance on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will publish the revised guidance tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in public information update: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 21.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “On Monday, the translation coordinator said the team would deliver the approved translation on Thursday.” Unsafe reading: “Today, the team certainly will deliver the approved translation tomorrow.” Controlled meaning: A Monday report about a Thursday intention retains Monday as its reference point.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: This is future-in-the-past, not an instruction issued by the present translator. The reported commitment may also have changed since the report. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Identify the original reporting date and check whether the target preserves attributed speech. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Diagnostic family 22: Ambiguous short-form dates

The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. Family-level diagnostic: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. For each example, the source-control sentence is not a claim about one universal grammar; it is a compact test of the intended temporal proposition.

Case 22.01 — experimental research

Source-control wording: “The research summary lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in experimental research: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this research summary, the next analyst could cite preliminary measurements as validated.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then check measurement dates against the recorded approval milestone. The evidence to request is the instrument log and approval trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.02 — software product release

Source-control wording: “The release notice lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in software product release: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this release notice, users could mistake a tentative deployment for a live feature.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then compare staging, approval and production timestamps separately. The evidence to request is the deployment log and version history, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.03 — archive restoration

Source-control wording: “The collection note lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in archive restoration: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this collection note, a reader could believe a fragile item is available before it has been cleared.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then check the conservation sign-off rather than the publication date of the catalog. The evidence to request is the condition record and handling register, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.04 — shipment operations

Source-control wording: “The shipment update lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in shipment operations: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this shipment update, a customer could confuse preparing a package with handing it to a carrier.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then separate packing, collection, transit and delivery timestamps. The evidence to request is the scan history and carrier handoff record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.05 — editorial publishing

Source-control wording: “The publication announcement lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in editorial publishing: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this publication announcement, readers could quote an unapproved wording as the final edition.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then distinguish draft, copyedited, approved and published states. The evidence to request is the revision history and release authorization, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.06 — course assessment

Source-control wording: “The course bulletin lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in course assessment: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this course bulletin, participants could assume provisional results are formally confirmed.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then check moderation completion before any announcement of finality. The evidence to request is the marking record and sign-off sequence, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.07 — maintenance planning

Source-control wording: “The maintenance notice lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in maintenance planning: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this maintenance notice, operators could resume use before inspection or authorization.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then verify the exact point when the equipment was cleared for use. The evidence to request is the service ticket and clearance certificate, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.08 — customer-account processing

Source-control wording: “The support message lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in customer-account processing: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this support message, a customer could be promised access that is still under review.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then compare request, verification, authorization and actual activation. The evidence to request is the support ticket and authorization trail, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.09 — public information update

Source-control wording: “The information bulletin lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in public information update: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this information bulletin, an old advisory could be read as a new operational instruction.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then keep the issue date, revision date and effective date distinct. The evidence to request is the consultation dates and signed publication note, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Case 22.10 — document translation project

Source-control wording: “The translation delivery note lists the date 04/05/2026 without an ordering convention.” Unsafe reading: “The translated notice asserts that this must mean 4 May 2026.” Controlled meaning: The source is ambiguous between conventions; confirm it before writing the month in words.

Why the difference matters in document translation project: The uncertainty is in the input data, not a translation challenge that creative prose may solve. Unverified assumptions must be queried. In this translation delivery note, a client could accept an unreviewed draft as the delivered version.

Independent audit: Seek a documented source convention or a primary record with an unambiguous month name. Then match the final translated file to the approved source revision. The evidence to request is the source version, query log and approval record, not a guess based on today’s calendar or the editor’s preference.

Failure modes: what to repair and what not to infer

1. Translation-date substitution

Failure: A relative day is interpreted from the day the draft was translated rather than the day the source message was issued. Repair: Preserve the original document anchor; where needed, insert an outside-the-quote editorial date label approved by the client. Diagnostic situation: A saved screenshot or archived email carries an older timestamp. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

2. Unmarked archival quotation

Failure: An old future statement appears as a fresh promise because quotation and dates were removed. Repair: Retain attribution and historical framing; do not modernize a promise without authorization. Diagnostic situation: A public archive republishes a six-month-old bulletin. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

3. Perfect-as-simple-past default

Failure: A target sentence loses relevance to a later reference moment. Repair: Map the reference time; use whatever target resources preserve the anterior relationship. Diagnostic situation: A task had finished before a separate approval meeting. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

4. Ongoing-as-finished inflation

Failure: An activity described as under way is translated as successfully concluded. Repair: Separate progress from completion and require completion evidence. Diagnostic situation: A review is in progress while a report is being circulated. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

5. Finished-as-stopped confusion

Failure: A stop, suspension or cancellation is mistaken for successful completion. Repair: Identify the phase transition explicitly, and distinguish cessation from achievement. Diagnostic situation: An inspection is halted without a signed approval. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

6. Future certainty inflation

Failure: A plan or forecast becomes a guaranteed outcome. Repair: Preserve planning and uncertainty markers rather than adding decisive future language. Diagnostic situation: A release note says “expected,” not “confirmed.” The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

7. Habitual-to-one-off shift

Failure: A general repeated pattern becomes a claim about the next occurrence. Repair: Keep scope and recurrence, not a fabricated booked date. Diagnostic situation: A manual describes what normally happens. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

8. One-off-to-habitual shift

Failure: A single required action turns into an indefinite recurring duty. Repair: Check quantifiers and whether “once” modifies the whole event. Diagnostic situation: A one-time handover follows project approval. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

9. By/until reversal

Failure: A latest-completion condition becomes a continued availability statement, or vice versa. Repair: Write two interpretations side by side and verify which is entailed. Diagnostic situation: An action deadline is confused with the closing of an option. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

10. Within/after reversal

Failure: An action required inside an interval is delayed until the interval is over. Repair: Draw a boundary at approval and test sample event times. Diagnostic situation: A task due within three days is postponed for three days. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

11. For/in confusion

Failure: An interval’s duration becomes an estimate of when the activity will begin. Repair: Check whether the event is already happening and for how long. Diagnostic situation: A service has been offline for two hours. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

12. Since/on collapse

Failure: A continuing state from a starting day becomes a single isolated event on that day. Repair: Identify the start and implied continuing relevance. Diagnostic situation: A team has been revising since Tuesday. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

13. Already/not-yet inversion

Failure: The milestone status is reversed despite correct nouns and dates. Repair: Use a two-state current-status diagnostic before language polishing. Diagnostic situation: A completed clearance is described as pending. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

14. Not-yet/never inflation

Failure: Temporary non-completion becomes permanent impossibility. Repair: Preserve the open future unless the source closes it. Diagnostic situation: The answer has not yet arrived. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

15. Before/after inversion

Failure: A dependency is reversed because a small connective seems inconspicuous. Repair: Write a chronology in event labels and compare it against each candidate. Diagnostic situation: A review must precede publication. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

16. During/throughout expansion

Failure: A single event within an interval is made continuous throughout the full interval. Repair: Ask whether a brief occurrence still makes the source true. Diagnostic situation: An observation made during a meeting is rendered as continuous monitoring. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

17. Next-week/seven-days drift

Failure: A calendar week is conflated with a rolling seven-day period. Repair: Define reference day and calendar convention; do not silently convert. Diagnostic situation: A plan says next week, not within seven days. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

18. Ambiguous numeric date guessing

Failure: The translator assumes day/month order without evidence. Repair: Check the source convention or request clarification; write months out when approved. Diagnostic situation: 04/05 appears in a compact schedule. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

19. Time zone assumed from audience

Failure: A clock time gains an offset or region that the source did not specify. Repair: Preserve the original clock value and flag zone information as missing. Diagnostic situation: A global webinar notice says only “14:00.” The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

20. Fixed offset for recurring event

Failure: A recurring appointment is permanently converted using a single offset. Repair: Check the actual time-zone rule for the event dates or leave it unresolved. Diagnostic situation: A weekly session extends across a clock-change season. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

21. Start date mistaken for effective date

Failure: Publication, signing, issue and commencement are conflated. Repair: Record each milestone separately and use the source’s chosen one. Diagnostic situation: A policy note is published before it takes effect. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

22. Status label temporal drift

Failure: A general word such as closed or cleared is assigned the wrong domain milestone. Repair: Use domain documentation and keep the phase label tied to its evidence. Diagnostic situation: Closed for editing does not mean approved for distribution. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

23. Negation scope distortion

Failure: “Not before” becomes “not after,” or the negative attaches to the wrong event. Repair: Parse the negative operator and boundary before drafting prose. Diagnostic situation: An access notice limits the earliest activation time. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

24. Temporal reference lost across paragraphs

Failure: A later sentence’s “then” attaches to the wrong event. Repair: Create a discourse-level event list and test pronoun-like temporal links. Diagnostic situation: A report narrates three separate reviews. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

25. Source ambiguity repaired by invention

Failure: The translator silently chooses one of several possible timelines. Repair: Record viable readings and query the source owner. Diagnostic situation: An undated message includes “last Friday.” The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

26. Formatting mistaken for meaning

Failure: A date gets a clean presentation but the event status remains wrong. Repair: Run semantic QA separately from locale-format QA. Diagnostic situation: An ISO-formatted timestamp accompanies a false completion claim. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

27. Target-language tense mimicry

Failure: The translator copies an English verb pattern even when the target language realizes time differently. Repair: Translate the proposition and test native target usage rather than force a form match. Diagnostic situation: A language uses aspectual markers or context instead of equivalent tense morphology. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

28. Approval sequence collapse

Failure: Review, authorization and release are merged into a single moment. Repair: List the phases and their evidential records separately. Diagnostic situation: The draft is complete but signature and launch remain pending. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

29. Conditional release removed

Failure: A future event conditioned on approval is stated as unconditional. Repair: Preserve the if/when or only-after dependency. Diagnostic situation: The document may be sent only after sign-off. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

30. Outdated copy promoted as current

Failure: A cached or syndicated text is treated as the most recent policy. Repair: Check version and effective dates; mark archival status. Diagnostic situation: Two revisions remain accessible online. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

31. Approximation changed to exactness

Failure: Around, approximately or no later than is replaced with an exact time. Repair: Respect uncertainty and upper/lower bounds in clock expressions. Diagnostic situation: A forecast window is described as exactly 15:00. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

32. Calendar system silently changed

Failure: Dates are converted across calendars without source identification or authority. Repair: Confirm the intended calendar and conversion rule. Diagnostic situation: Historical material uses a nonstandard calendar reference. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

33. Clock notation incomplete

Failure: A 12-hour value loses AM/PM or the day rollover is omitted. Repair: Record a complete time representation and verify its date. Diagnostic situation: A midnight-adjacent maintenance window is abbreviated. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

34. Reviewer checks fluency only

Failure: A smooth target is approved without source-to-target comparison. Repair: Require a separate bilingual temporal check for high-risk fields. Diagnostic situation: The reviewer is impressed by style despite an inverted deadline. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

35. Source correction hidden as translation

Failure: A suspected author error is fixed silently in the target. Repair: Document the proposed correction and get authorization; distinguish translation from editing. Diagnostic situation: The source contains a likely typo in a deadline. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

36. Version-control mismatch

Failure: The translation reflects an obsolete source section while newer source updates exist. Repair: Bind each delivered target file to a source revision, re-check changed clauses. Diagnostic situation: The paragraph’s date was corrected after translation began. The reviewer should mark the smallest affected claim, reconstruct the source timeline, and verify whether the revised text still respects that same time relationship. A correction that adds missing facts is not automatically preferable to an explicit unresolved query.

Transfer workshops: practice beyond one sentence

Workshop 1: A three-email chain

Task: Place three dated emails in order; for each “tomorrow” and “next week,” mark the writer’s timestamp before translating any promises. Successful transfer: Keep the original messages intact, add external editorial chronology if necessary, and test whether readers can still distinguish earlier predictions from later outcomes. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 2: An experimental abstract

Task: Compare the sentence describing what researchers did with the sentence describing what remains under investigation. Successful transfer: Keep the completed procedure separate from current uncertainty and the present status of the evidence; do not turn observation into ongoing intervention. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 3: A maintenance bulletin

Task: Extract when a machine was stopped, inspected, approved and brought back into operation. Successful transfer: Check whether “may be reopened” expresses permission rather than confirmation of actual reopening. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 4: An archived speech

Task: Identify historical present and genuine references to the original speaker’s future. Successful transfer: Do not convert the whole passage into current claims; keep rhetorical vividness and the past frame where the target idiom allows it. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 5: A two-stage approval email

Task: Distinguish “after review” and “after approval” when the two stages occur on different dates. Successful transfer: Use a dependency graph; the correct temporal relation does not follow automatically from a fluent verb. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 6: A recurring course schedule

Task: Compare a fixed weekday rule against every seven days and every other week. Successful transfer: Create a sample calendar and check whether the same sessions would actually occur under the proposed target instruction. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 7: A shared interface deadline

Task: Translate a button label and its accompanying “available until” notice without turning it into a mandatory deadline. Successful transfer: Separate the interface state from user obligations; verify whether the source defines an inclusive endpoint. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 8: A narrative flashback

Task: Mark the narrator’s story-now, the remembered earlier event and the later consequence. Successful transfer: Try a target draft and ask a reader to order events from the translation alone. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 9: A dated quotation in a new edition

Task: Republish a document in which “yesterday” names an event many years earlier. Successful transfer: Keep the quotation untouched and offer an accurately framed editor note when readers require an explicit calendar date. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 10: A laboratory progress report

Task: Distinguish “was testing,” “had tested,” “has tested” and “will test” in a four-line record. Successful transfer: Review the reference time of every clause and the evidential status of the result. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 11: A shipping status thread

Task: Build a timeline from packed, collected, dispatched and delivered states. Successful transfer: Reject any target wording that collapses an earlier milestone into a later one without source evidence. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 12: An interview transcript

Task: Preserve the interviewee’s original day references when a transcript is published later. Successful transfer: Keep speaker turns and timestamps, and do not replace reported experience with editor assumptions. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 13: A safety warning

Task: Compare no earlier than, no later than and not until in several versions of an instruction. Successful transfer: Identify allowed and forbidden intervals. Seek authorized clarification whenever a boundary changes what someone may safely do. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 14: A bilingual revision log

Task: Track source changes that alter dates or completion status after initial translation. Successful transfer: Update only the affected new deliverable’s text, not the unrelated source; log what was rechecked and why. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 15: A calendar invite

Task: Identify local clock value, offset, time-zone identifier and one-off versus recurring event. Successful transfer: Do not invent a converted time. Use verified scheduling data where conversion is part of the assignment. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 16: An editorial embargo

Task: Differentiate information being written, accepted, ready, embargoed and publicly released. Successful transfer: A temporal wording error could make a draft appear lawfully or operationally releasable earlier than authorized. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 17: A predictive statement

Task: Compare “is likely,” “is scheduled,” “is promised” and “is already completed” with the same event and date. Successful transfer: Keep modality separate from calendar reference; a future time is not proof of certainty. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 18: A document with 04/05

Task: Reformat an ambiguous date only after documenting whether the source intended day-month or month-day order. Successful transfer: If no source convention can be confirmed, preserve ambiguity visibly or query; do not guess from readership. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 19: A multi-author report

Task: Check whether “now” belongs to the original field note or the final report’s author. Successful transfer: Identify whose voice controls the sentence before drafting a claim about current conditions. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

Workshop 20: A training instruction

Task: Translate an action that occurs once, every two days, and twice a week across three distinct scenarios. Successful transfer: Count actual events and confirm that the proposed target routine matches the source’s recurrence scope. For the exercise, write a source event ledger and a separate target interpretation ledger. Compare each row for start, end, overlap, recurrence and certainty. Record which facts were supplied directly and which remain assumptions so that another translator can reproduce the decision.

For a stronger test, deliberately draft one fluent but false alternative that alters only a time connector or event phase. Give it to a reviewer with the original context and ask for the first contradiction they can locate. Then revise the translation without adding a new date, actor or commitment. This catches a failure that ordinary proofreading often misses: an apparently well-written sentence that licenses a different action on a different day.

A four-week implementation plan

Week 1 — map time before wording

Practice: Select twelve short source passages covering dated messages, narrative, instructions and reports. For each, identify statement time, event time, reference time, recurrence and unresolved bounds. Do not translate until the event ledger is complete. Evidence of improvement: A correct ledger in which two independent readers agree on the source event order; log disagreements rather than forcing consensus. Measure quality by whether the target preserves event relations and actionable constraints, not by whether it imitates one particular grammatical form. Improvements should be visible in fewer critical mismatches and clearer reviewer decisions, not in a merely longer manuscript.

Week 2 — create and stress-test translations

Practice: Draft target versions of the same passages. Add deliberate challenge items involving by/until, within/after, since/for, habitual/future and not yet/never. Record why the chosen target phrasing is idiomatic. Evidence of improvement: A bilingual review sheet showing the exact sentence, temporal proposition, alternative reading and rejection reason for every critical item. Measure quality by whether the target preserves event relations and actionable constraints, not by whether it imitates one particular grammatical form. Improvements should be visible in fewer critical mismatches and clearer reviewer decisions, not in a merely longer manuscript.

Week 3 — test dates and document context

Practice: Use archived quotes, ambiguous short dates, recurring schedules and time-zone-aware events. Keep formatting and semantic interpretation as separate approval tasks; do not perform real time conversion without verified zone data. Evidence of improvement: A traceable decision record for every displayed date, scheduling convention, quoted relative time and unresolved ambiguity. Measure quality by whether the target preserves event relations and actionable constraints, not by whether it imitates one particular grammatical form. Improvements should be visible in fewer critical mismatches and clearer reviewer decisions, not in a merely longer manuscript.

Week 4 — independent review and transfer

Practice: Ask another qualified language professional to describe target timelines without seeing the original ledgers first, then compare their readings with the source. Repeat the exercise on a new genre. Evidence of improvement: A compact portfolio of corrected errors, accepted alternatives, documented queries, and the generalizable decisions needed for future projects. Measure quality by whether the target preserves event relations and actionable constraints, not by whether it imitates one particular grammatical form. Improvements should be visible in fewer critical mismatches and clearer reviewer decisions, not in a merely longer manuscript.

Working glossary: distinctions worth checking

Assertion time

The time at which a speaker or document makes a claim, often a reference for deictic words.

Event time

The interval or point at which the described action or state occurs.

Reference time

The temporal viewpoint from which an event is described.

Tense

A grammatical device for locating a situation relative to a temporal reference, varying across languages.

Aspect

A grammatical or semantic way of viewing the internal temporal structure of a situation.

Perfect

A construction that can relate a prior situation to a reference time; its usage is language-specific.

Progressive

A viewpoint commonly associated with an unfolding situation, not necessarily with completion.

Habitual

A reading that describes regular practice or characteristic recurrence.

Prospective

A reading or construction oriented toward a future or anticipated situation.

Anteriority

The relation in which one event occurs before a chosen reference point.

Posteriority

The relation in which an event occurs after the relevant reference point.

Simultaneity

Temporal coexistence or overlap of situations, which can be partial or complete.

Deixis

Context-dependent pointing, including the temporal meaning of now, then, today and tomorrow.

Anaphora

Reference to something previously introduced in discourse, including earlier temporal anchors.

Deictic centre

The person, place or time functioning as the present interpretive viewpoint.

Timeline ledger

An audit record of events, their boundaries and their relations.

Duration

The amount of time an event or state lasts.

Interval

A continuous temporal stretch with potentially specified start and end boundaries.

Endpoint

The beginning or finishing boundary of an event, permission or deadline period.

Inclusivity

Whether a named boundary belongs to the allowed or described interval.

Deadline

A latest permissible or required completion point, subject to its formal definition.

Availability window

A period during which access, a service or a choice is offered.

Delay

The elapsed time until another event, distinct from event duration.

Recurrence

The repeated occurrence of an event according to a pattern or rule.

Calendar week

A culturally or system-defined week period, not necessarily equal in meaning to next seven days.

Rolling period

An interval measured from a moving reference point.

Offset

A numerical difference from a reference clock such as UTC at a particular instant.

Time-zone identifier

A named rule set for local civil time, including historical or seasonal adjustments.

Clock time

The displayed hour and minute, insufficient alone for global conversion.

ISO 8601

A family of international date/time representation conventions; applicability and precise profile depend on the use case.

Locale

Language and regional preference information that can influence date/time display conventions.

Calendar system

The rules used to name years, months and days.

Source convention

The original document’s established method for writing or interpreting data.

Target convention

The intended audience’s agreed form for displaying temporal information.

Revision

A bilingual accuracy check comparing the target against the source text.

Temporal ambiguity

A source form permitting more than one time relation or date interpretation.

Modality

Expression of possibility, obligation, permission, prediction, intention or certainty.

Forecast

An assertion about a prospective event that may retain uncertainty.

Scheduled event

An event entered into a plan or timetable, not proof of completion.

Historical present

Use of present-tense-like narration for events situated in the past.

Future in the past

A future event described relative to an earlier reference point.

Phase transition

The beginning, interruption, resumption, completion or cessation of an activity.

Evidence trail

Source versions, logs and approvals that permit a translation decision to be checked.

Reader action test

A quality check asking whether readers would do or infer the same thing from source and target.

Frequently asked questions

1. Is tense the same as time?

No. Tense is a grammatical means of expressing temporal relations, whereas a sentence’s time can also be supplied by dates, context, adverbs, aspect and discourse. Languages differ in how these resources are distributed.

2. Can I translate all past tense verbs with one past tense form?

Not safely. Ask whether the source signals completed events, ongoing states, habits, backgrounding, earlier-than-past relations or a hypothetical reading. Form matching is not a replacement for temporal interpretation.

3. Why is aspect important in translation?

Aspect helps readers understand whether a situation is bounded, in progress, repeated or otherwise viewed internally. The difference can affect whether a milestone is believed finished or pending.

4. What does “by Friday” mean in a deadline?

Usually it establishes a latest point for completion, but the exact clock boundary and inclusivity may require a stated convention. It does not automatically mean the action can continue indefinitely through a later period.

5. Is “until Friday” the same as “by Friday”?

No. Until often describes continuation of a state or availability to a boundary; by commonly marks latest completion. Clarify the precise endpoint where operational consequences matter.

6. Does “within three days” mean after three days?

No. It usually means during a period no longer than three days following the anchor. After three days places the event beyond that elapsed interval. Identify the start time and applicable counting convention.

7. How is “for three days” different from “in three days”?

For three days often measures duration of activity or state. In three days can locate an event in the future relative to a reference time. Context matters, so do not reduce the two to a single generic time phrase.

8. How should “since Tuesday” be checked?

Determine Tuesday’s role as a start point and whether the source claims continuing relevance at the reference time. Do not flatten it into an isolated event that merely happened on Tuesday.

9. Is “has finished” always equivalent to “finished”?

Not in every context. A perfect construction can connect a prior event to the present or another reference moment. If that relation matters, check the target reader’s interpretation of current status.

10. How should translators handle “not yet”?

Preserve the state of non-completion at the specified reference time, while leaving later completion possible unless the source explicitly rules it out.

11. Does “already” change meaning?

Yes. Already can indicate completion before an expected or relevant reference point. Dropping or reversing it may change whether the target reader treats the event as done.

12. What if the source has no explicit tense morphology?

Use context, aspect, adverbs, timeline relations and the language’s own grammar to identify the intended time. Never impose a specific English tense solely because the target sentence needs a verb.

13. Can future reference occur without a future tense?

Yes. Calendar expressions, schedules, adverbs and other grammatical constructions can locate an event in the future. Translate the future relationship and any uncertainty, not a presumed tense label.

14. How should reported speech be translated?

Keep the original speaker, report time and event time distinct. A reported tomorrow may refer to the following day in the past, not tomorrow for the current reader.

15. What is future in the past?

It is a later event described from an earlier temporal viewpoint, as in a Monday report that something would happen on Thursday. The original reporting perspective must remain visible.

16. How do I preserve a narrative flashback?

Map when the narrator is speaking, when the remembered event occurred, and how later reference points relate. Have another reader reconstruct the order from the target alone.

17. Should a historical present be changed to past?

Not automatically. Historical present can be a narrative strategy. Reconstruct the intended literary effect in natural target-language prose while preserving the historical event frame.

18. Should “today” be updated in an old quotation?

Do not silently update the quotation. Preserve its source-time reference and, if needed, add a clearly marked contextual note outside the quotation.

19. How do I translate “next Friday”?

Establish the utterance date and intended convention. If there is a real ambiguity, do not manufacture a precise calendar day; query or clarify in a transparent editorial note.

20. What happens when a source date is written 04/05?

The numeric order may be ambiguous. Find an explicit source convention or primary record before spelling out the month. Treat an unresolved date as unresolved data.

21. Can I use an ISO date for every audience?

An unambiguous format may be useful for records and systems, but presentation and audience requirements vary. Decide whether the string is data to preserve, text to localize or both.

22. Is an offset the same as a time zone?

No. An offset states a numerical difference at a particular moment, while a time-zone identifier can govern changing rules across dates. Do not extrapolate a recurring schedule from one offset.

23. When should clock times be converted?

Only when the assignment calls for it and the source supplies enough reliable zone and date information. Translating a timestamp’s label does not by itself authorize converting the instant.

24. Can machine translation handle these distinctions?

Systems can produce useful drafts but can lose discourse context or choose a fluent incorrect temporal anchor. Evaluate the translated timeline explicitly, especially for quoted, recurring or deadline-bearing text.

25. What does an independent reviser check?

The reviser compares source and target meaning, not only the smoothness of target prose. For time claims, that includes events, ordering, duration, status, certainty, bounds and formatting.

26. How do I decide whether an error is critical?

Ask whether the shift could change action timing, permission, safety, evidence status or the interpretation of a factual event. Severity depends on the purpose and reader’s possible response.

27. Should I resolve every ambiguous source sentence?

No. Where the source remains genuinely ambiguous and the decision matters, query the responsible party or preserve an appropriately transparent ambiguity. An unsupported precise claim is not faithful.

28. What if the source appears factually wrong?

Flag it. A translation does not become licensed source editing merely because a likely correction seems obvious. Seek authorized correction and keep a record of the source change.

29. Is this an English grammar course?

No. English forms are used to reveal semantic contrasts, but the owner of this chapter is the cross-language transfer decision. The protected How English Works route is for English itself.

30. Is vocabulary knowledge enough to translate time accurately?

No. Knowing individual equivalents does not establish which event a pronoun-like temporal word points to or whether a milestone is complete. The translation root handles cross-language choices; the Vocabulary Learning Hub handles vocabulary acquisition.

31. Why not simply translate word for word?

Languages differ in time marking and conventional expression. A literal sequence may leave the wrong order, duration or status. Meaning-preserving reconstruction can be more faithful than form copying.

32. What is the fastest useful quality check?

Write the source’s event order and current status in two short lines. Ask whether a target-language reader, seeing only the target, can recover those same two facts.

33. How do I avoid duplicate work with other translation chapters?

Use this child only when a cross-language time anchor, event phase, deadline, duration or calendar interpretation is the core problem. Follow the root for the broader system and other specialized chapters for their distinct mechanisms.

34. What is a good practice routine?

Take one dated message, one procedure and one narrative passage. Annotate time anchors before translating, compare two possible target versions, and have someone else explain their timeline from the target alone.

35. How can I use this method in an unfamiliar language pair?

Use the event ledger and diagnostic questions as a planning framework, then consult qualified practitioners, reliable language-specific resources and domain evidence. Avoid presenting speculative equivalents as verified usage.

36. What does high-quality publication require?

A coherent source reading, an idiomatic target, a documented method for unresolved ambiguity, a competent review of critical temporal claims, and no false promise of compliance or certainty.

37. Is there a universal perfect translation?

No single formulation is universally best. Audience, genre, register and language structure matter, but the underlying timeline and the source’s warranted commitments should survive each acceptable version.

Research, standards and external reference points

As checked on 5 November 2026, ISO 17100:2015 remains the published translation-services standard on ISO’s page; the second edition is shown as an approved work item under development, not a published replacement. The relevant lesson here is careful translation-service processes and specifications, not a claim of certification or a claim that a single web article satisfies any ISO standard.

ISO 5060:2024 supplies general guidance on human evaluation of translation output, including error categories and evaluation design; ISO 11669:2024 guides translation-project specifications and risk analysis. This chapter’s example event ledgers and workshop scores are teaching devices, not official ISO scoring instruments or proprietary standard text.

For representation and display, consult W3C Internationalization Best Practices for Spec Developers and Unicode CLDR Technical Standard #35, Part 4: Dates (version 49, dated 21 October 2026). Those resources concern robust data and locale-sensitive date/time formatting. They do not replace source-language interpretation or authorize guessing an unspecified time zone.

For the linguistic question of temporal meaning across languages, see Pei-Shu Tsai (2023), analysis of tense and aspect shifts in Chinese–English translation, Watanabe and Sältzer (2023), semantic temporality across texts, Kiyong Lee (2023), temporal relators and time/event interpretation, and Voita, Sennrich and Titov (2019), context-aware translation of deixis and cohesion. The studies support the need to examine time reference and document context; they should not be mistaken for evidence that one verb form has a universal cross-language equivalent.

Next routes and the boundary of this chapter

Return to Master Art of Translation | The Complete System for Moving Meaning Between Languages for the world-facing system of equivalence, source interpretation, drafting and verification. The previous reserved-tens child, Rhetorical Pattern Transfer, addresses repetition and persuasive form, not the temporal relationships owned here. The two questions can overlap in a passage, but their diagnostic owners remain separate.

Go to the protected Vocabulary Learning Hub when a reader needs to learn the meanings and uses of individual time-related words, and to the protected How English Works when the primary task is understanding English grammar and discourse within English. These are outward learning routes, not permission to rewrite or duplicate either owner.

The repeatable translation sequence is simple to remember: establish the speaker’s clock, map the event clock, separate phase from prediction, locate each boundary, draft in the target language, test the target reader’s interpretation, and record unresolved questions. This preserves a meaning that cannot be recovered from word substitution alone: not simply what happened, but when, for how long, in what order, with what certainty, and under which conditions.