{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T08:49:18Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 23.3, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a094cd-78c2-7f30-86e0-06e6f4b2a171\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: comparison of American and British English\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: INF.KNW\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 100", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 69.9, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a094cd-78d1-79b0-b67d-41838c52f9da\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: comparison of American and British English\nRegistry id: vr.tr.comparison-of-american-and-british-english\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.KNW\nRegistry defin" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:39:13+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "owners" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T10:10:33+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q840832", "registryId": "vr.tr.comparison-of-american-and-british-english", "name": "comparison of American and British English", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.KNW" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q840832/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.comparison-of-american-and-british-english", "name": "comparison of American and British English", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to identify, assess and apply evidence-backed comparisons between specified American and British English usages without treating either variety as uniform or inherently preferable.", "definition": "Comparison of American and British English is the contrastive study of English varieties associated with the United States and the United Kingdom, examining their similarities and differences in pronunciation, spelling, vocabulary, grammar and usage.", "scope_statement": "This model owns the comparison of American and British English as a structured knowledge subject: its comparison units, linguistic contrasts, evidential support, contextual limits and implications for interpretation or adaptation.", "in_scope": [ "Definition of the American and British varieties, populations and usage contexts being compared", "Contrasts and shared patterns in spelling, vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation and discourse", "Alignment of comparable meanings, constructions, speech situations and text genres", "Evidence supporting the direction, prevalence and limits of a proposed contrast", "Decisions about interpreting, teaching or adapting language across the compared varieties" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Complete descriptions of American English or British English as independent language varieties", "Comparisons involving other English varieties except where needed to test a claimed American-British distinction", "Individual speakers, language institutions and linguistic publications as independently managed entities", "General theories of dialect variation or historical language change", "Production and lifecycle management of translated or localized documents" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "A comparison identifies corresponding American and British usages under stated conditions; a description of only one variety does not qualify.", "A proposed contrast aligns meaning, grammatical function or communicative purpose before treating different forms as counterparts.", "A difference in frequency or preference is distinguished from a claim that a form exists exclusively in one variety.", "Regional, social, temporal and genre variation can qualify or defeat a national-level generalization.", "The subject is a body of comparative knowledge, rather than a third English variety or a rule that one national standard supersedes the other." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Compared variety profiles", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Paired descriptions of geographic coverage, speaker populations, reference standards and relevant subvarieties", "why_it_matters": "The labels American and British alone do not establish which usages are comparable." }, { "name": "Linguistic comparison level", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Orthography; vocabulary and meaning; grammar; pronunciation; discourse and pragmatics", "why_it_matters": "Different levels require different comparison units and evidence." }, { "name": "Correspondence type", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Different forms with aligned meanings; shared form with divergent meanings; frequency preference; distributional difference; shared usage; unresolved", "why_it_matters": "An agent must distinguish substitution opportunities from ambiguities and unsupported contrasts." }, { "name": "Usage context", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Specified combinations of spoken or written medium, genre, register, audience and communicative situation", "why_it_matters": "A contrast may be useful only within particular contexts." }, { "name": "Observation period", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Calendar year or year interval for the underlying observations", "why_it_matters": "A comparison must not silently present historical evidence as current usage." }, { "name": "Relative usage rate", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Occurrences per million words or percentage of eligible contexts, separately for each aligned sample", "why_it_matters": "Frequency claims need explicit denominators and comparable samples." }, { "name": "Evidence assessment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Unassessed; supported within stated scope; mixed evidence; insufficient evidence; superseded", "why_it_matters": "The agent needs to know whether a contrast can support a decision." }, { "name": "Adaptation requirement", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "No change; optional preference; target-style requirement; meaning-sensitive revision; human review", "why_it_matters": "A documented difference does not automatically justify changing a text." } ], "affordances": [ "Retrieve paired usages with their meanings, contexts, evidence and exceptions", "Test whether an apparent national difference survives controls for region, genre and observation period", "Identify shared forms whose interpretation may differ across the compared contexts", "Suggest audience-appropriate adaptations while preserving meaning, quotations and named entities", "Generate teaching examples that distinguish preferences from categorical restrictions", "Flag comparisons that require additional evidence or specialist review" ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Explain differences in spelling, vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation between American and British English.", "Adapt a text to one variety when the user asks." ], "must_not": [ "Present either variety as correct and the other as wrong.", "Treat the two varieties as the only forms of English.", "Mock speakers for their accent or usage.", "Overstate differences or invent them." ], "requires_human": [ "Changing a published or legal text from one variety to the other." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Language judgements can disadvantage speakers in school, work and migration.", "Many other varieties of English are equally valid." ], "affected_parties": [ "English speakers worldwide", "Learners of English", "Speakers of other varieties" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody owns the comparison; dictionaries and linguists document usage.", "master_systems": [] }, "what_it_is_for": [ "This comparison is used in language teaching, translation, editing and linguistic research to explain differences among specified English varieties.", "It supports audience appropriate wording and interpretation when regional usage affects spelling, pronunciation, vocabulary or grammar." ], "standards_and_regulation": [ "BCP 47, issued by the Internet Engineering Task Force, provides language tags such as en-US and en-GB for identifying regional English content used in comparisons." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Treating either national variety as uniform can erase regional, social and contextual differences.", "Assuming superficially similar words have identical meanings can produce misunderstandings or inaccurate translations.", "Presenting one variety as inherently superior can reinforce prejudice against speakers of other varieties.", "Applying regional substitutions without context can alter intended meaning in technical or contractual text." ], "facets_not_applicable": { "recognition": "A linguistic comparison is an abstract analytical activity and has no intrinsic visual identification cues." } }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q840832: comparison of American and British English", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q840832", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Comparison of American and British English", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_American_and_British_English", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "comparison-frame-and-evidence", "name": "Comparison frame and evidence", "description": "Establishes what American and British English mean in a particular comparison and how its claims can be assessed.", "rationale": "National labels can conceal differences in sampling and scope that make a proposed contrast misleading.", "layers": [ { "id": "variety-and-context-boundaries", "name": "Variety and context boundaries", "description": "Defines the populations, standards, periods and communicative contexts represented on each side.", "findings": [ { "id": "explicit-comparison-populations", "name": "Explicit comparison populations", "description": "Record the actual varieties and contexts represented instead of assuming that national labels describe all speakers.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which geographic areas, speaker groups and reference standards are included under American and British English here?", "kind": "definition", "id": "explicit-comparison-populations-q01" }, { "text": "Which differences in period, medium, genre or population prevent the two samples from supporting a direct comparison?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "explicit-comparison-populations-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "claim-support-and-strength", "name": "Claim support and strength", "description": "Connects comparative propositions to traceable observations and appropriately limited conclusions.", "findings": [ { "id": "assessable-contrast-evidence", "name": "Assessable contrast evidence", "description": "Record whether a contrast comes from observed usage, reference description or a prescriptive style rule, together with its limitations.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which inspected sources or datasets support each side of the contrast, and do they describe usage or prescribe it?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "assessable-contrast-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "What sample sizes, denominators and uncertainty estimates support any claimed difference in prevalence?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "assessable-contrast-evidence-q02" }, { "text": "What conflicting observations or counterexamples limit the contrast?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "assessable-contrast-evidence-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "spelling-and-written-conventions", "name": "Spelling and written conventions", "description": "Organizes comparisons of written word forms and editorial conventions.", "rationale": "Written differences may support adaptation, but their reach must be established at the word, construction or style-guide level.", "layers": [ { "id": "word-form-correspondence", "name": "Word-form correspondence", "description": "Aligns spelling variants while preserving lexical identity and meaning.", "findings": [ { "id": "bounded-spelling-patterns", "name": "Bounded spelling patterns", "description": "Record candidate spelling correspondences, their attested coverage and exceptions instead of treating suffix resemblance as a universal conversion rule.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which spellings represent the same lexical item and sense in the two comparison contexts?", "kind": "definition", "id": "bounded-spelling-patterns-q01" }, { "text": "Which words, inflected forms, proper names or quotations must be excluded from a proposed spelling conversion?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "bounded-spelling-patterns-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "editorial-and-formatting-conventions", "name": "Editorial and formatting conventions", "description": "Separates national usage claims from choices imposed by publishers or other editorial authorities.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-written-conventions", "name": "Attributed written conventions", "description": "Record punctuation, capitalization, abbreviation and date-format conventions with their governing context.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which evidence attributes the convention to a variety, and which evidence attributes it only to a named style guide?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributed-written-conventions-q01" }, { "text": "Which target convention should govern an adaptation when the audience preference and house style differ?", "kind": "action", "id": "attributed-written-conventions-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "vocabulary-meaning-and-grammar", "name": "Vocabulary, meaning and grammar", "description": "Represents lexical and grammatical comparisons through aligned senses, functions and usage contexts.", "rationale": "Superficially corresponding words or sentences can differ in meaning, grammatical distribution or pragmatic effect.", "layers": [ { "id": "lexical-and-semantic-alignment", "name": "Lexical and semantic alignment", "description": "Distinguishes alternative labels from shared words with different interpretations.", "findings": [ { "id": "sense-specific-lexical-counterparts", "name": "Sense-specific lexical counterparts", "description": "Record counterparts at the sense level, including partial equivalence and vocabulary tied to different institutions or practices.", "questions": [ { "text": "Do the paired expressions denote the same referent or sense, or only roughly analogous concepts?", "kind": "definition", "id": "sense-specific-lexical-counterparts-q01" }, { "text": "In which contexts would substituting one expression for the other change meaning, register or institutional reference?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "sense-specific-lexical-counterparts-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "grammatical-distribution", "name": "Grammatical distribution", "description": "Compares constructions under matched syntactic and communicative conditions.", "findings": [ { "id": "construction-specific-contrasts", "name": "Construction-specific contrasts", "description": "Record candidate differences involving tense and aspect, agreement, prepositions or complementation as construction-level claims.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which grammatical function and conditioning environment define the constructions being compared?", "kind": "definition", "id": "construction-specific-contrasts-q01" }, { "text": "How often does each variant occur among eligible contexts in each variety, with register and period controlled?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "construction-specific-contrasts-q02" }, { "text": "Does the evidence establish a preference, an acceptability restriction or a prescribed editorial choice?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "construction-specific-contrasts-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "pronunciation-and-spoken-interaction", "name": "Pronunciation and spoken interaction", "description": "Handles sound patterns and conversational interpretation through explicitly identified accents and settings.", "rationale": "Pronunciation and interaction cannot be reliably compared using an unspecified national speaker as the reference.", "layers": [ { "id": "accent-and-sound-correspondence", "name": "Accent and sound correspondence", "description": "Aligns pronunciation observations using specified accent profiles and transcription conventions.", "findings": [ { "id": "accent-scoped-pronunciation", "name": "Accent-scoped pronunciation", "description": "Record sound contrasts at the relevant segment, word or prosodic level with limits on accent coverage.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which named accents, phonetic environments and transcription conventions define the pronunciation comparison?", "kind": "definition", "id": "accent-scoped-pronunciation-q01" }, { "text": "Which recordings or phonetic descriptions support the proposed sound or stress correspondence?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "accent-scoped-pronunciation-q02" }, { "text": "Which regional or speaker-level variants prevent extending this observation to the whole national variety?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "accent-scoped-pronunciation-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "discourse-and-pragmatic-interpretation", "name": "Discourse and pragmatic interpretation", "description": "Examines interpretation in matched conversational situations without converting cultural impressions into language rules.", "findings": [ { "id": "situated-interactional-contrasts", "name": "Situated interactional contrasts", "description": "Record evidence about expressions, turn patterns or prosody in specific activities and participant relationships.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which interactional purpose and participant relationship are held comparable across the observations?", "kind": "definition", "id": "situated-interactional-contrasts-q01" }, { "text": "What recorded interaction or participant-interpretation evidence supports the proposed pragmatic difference?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "situated-interactional-contrasts-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "application-and-maintenance", "name": "Application and maintenance", "description": "Turns qualified contrasts into adaptation decisions and keeps those decisions tied to current evidence.", "rationale": "An agent must know when a comparison warrants intervention and when its supporting knowledge needs reassessment.", "layers": [ { "id": "audience-directed-adaptation", "name": "Audience-directed adaptation", "description": "Determines whether a documented contrast should affect a particular text or learning task.", "findings": [ { "id": "meaning-preserving-adaptation", "name": "Meaning-preserving adaptation", "description": "Record the target audience, applicable style requirements and semantic checks needed before changing an expression.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the task require a specific American or British standard, or is either usage acceptable to the intended audience?", "kind": "action", "id": "meaning-preserving-adaptation-q01" }, { "text": "Which proposed changes require contextual review because they could alter meaning, voice, quotation fidelity or a named entity?", "kind": "action", "id": "meaning-preserving-adaptation-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "reassessment-and-change", "name": "Reassessment and change", "description": "Tracks whether a contrast remains supported within its original temporal and contextual scope.", "findings": [ { "id": "contrast-review-triggers", "name": "Contrast review triggers", "description": "Record the evidence date and conditions that would justify revising or retiring a comparative claim.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which observation periods and source editions support the current comparison?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "contrast-review-triggers-q01" }, { "text": "What new evidence would trigger narrowing, revising or retiring the contrast and its adaptation guidance?", "kind": "action", "id": "contrast-review-triggers-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes", "name": "Check these first", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "This is a comparative topic within linguistics, not necessarily an independently institutionalized discipline.", "Individual contrasts should be checked against contemporary corpora with comparable genres and speaker populations.", "The intended scope of British English should be stated explicitly, particularly whether the comparison concerns written standards, reference accents or regional speech." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Pronunciation comparison", "Spelling and punctuation comparison", "Vocabulary and meaning comparison", "Grammatical comparison", "Pragmatic and discourse comparison" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "BCP 47 language tags", "value_or_pattern": "en-US; en-GB", "note": "These identify English associated with the United States and United Kingdom, respectively; they do not identify the comparison itself or specify a regional accent." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Localizing software, websites and documentation for American or British audiences", "Teaching English and explaining alternative accepted usages", "Editing publications for a specified house style", "Designing speech recognition and speech synthesis systems", "Comparing language corpora to study variation and change" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Treating either national variety as internally uniform", "Presenting tendencies as categorical rules despite overlap and exceptions", "Confusing spelling conventions with pronunciation differences", "Mistaking differences in genre, age or formality for national differences", "Treating one variety as inherently more correct than the other" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Both countries contain regional and social varieties that complicate national comparisons.", "General American and Received Pronunciation are useful reference accents but do not represent all American or British speakers.", "Other English varieties, including Canadian, Australian and Irish English, do not fit neatly into an American-British binary." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "name": "American English", "difference": "The varieties associated with the United States are an object of comparison, whereas this topic concerns their relationship to British varieties." }, { "name": "British English", "difference": "The varieties associated with the United Kingdom are an object of comparison, whereas this topic concerns their relationship to American varieties." }, { "name": "Dialectology", "difference": "Dialectology studies dialect variation generally; this comparison selects two broad national groupings." }, { "name": "Contrastive linguistics", "difference": "Contrastive linguistics compares languages or varieties generally; this topic restricts the comparison to American and British English." }, { "name": "World Englishes", "difference": "World Englishes examines English varieties globally rather than concentrating on this particular pair." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does an existing Vercy world model already own this comparative subject, requiring this registry entry to link to it?", "Which operational boundaries should define British English and American English for this entry, including regional and national subvarieties?", "Which inspected reference works and suitably matched corpora can support an initial set of contrasts across written and spoken usage?", "What evidence thresholds should distinguish a national preference from a regional, genre-specific or editorial convention?", "Which proposed contrasts remain current, and which are disputed, converging or supported only for an earlier observation period?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 17, "questions": 30 } }