The claim
A50 §7: “I’d replace the strong claim Translation preserves the structure of communicative operations with something that accommodates both preservation and transformation: Translation is a context-conditioned transport process that preserves selected structures of communicative meaning to varying degrees while introducing systematic distortions that may accumulate, attenuate, or amplify under composition.” A52, outline v4, What Survives Translation? Communicative Frames, Dynamical Transport, and the Evolution of Meaning: “Translation is a context-conditioned process of communicative reconstruction. Each act of reconstruction transports aspects of an utterance’s semantic, pragmatic, and interactional structure into a new realization while introducing distortions shaped by the interpreter, communicative frame, and transmission environment.”
A52 §1.1 put the question it answers: “What must survive a transformation for the resulting utterance to remain recognizably a translation of the original?”, the nearest ancestor of the title question (QUESTION-002).
Why it was replaced
Under U30, proposal v5 put observational structure first (CLAIM-124); under U31 the thesis became decision-relevant information (CLAIM-026). The manuscript keeps every part of it in §6 and §8 and moves the thesis to what transport (TERM-008) preserves: observables and their relations (CLAIM-115). That move is later than this chunk.