Why it is a question
A52 §12.4, “Contextuality under transmission”: “Investigate how contextual judgment structure evolves as an utterance undergoes repeated reconstruction. Ask whether certain forms of pragmatic drift systematically reduce or increase measured contextual dependencies.”
It is the one point where the two halves of the manuscript, serial reconstruction (§8) and contextuality (§3, §9), would bear on each other. The manuscript’s Proposition 2 says when a transport preserves a global extension, so it gives a sufficient condition for contextuality not to appear. It says nothing about drift that removes it.
What would count as an answer
Repeated reconstruction chains (§10 Case II) scored with an overlapping-context design at each stage. Or a theorem saying which classes of reconstruction kernel can create or destroy global-extension failure.