Explanation
This Year 1 rule records a recurring mapping boundary observed in Cycle 2, Home and Family. It is not a shortcut for translating every sentence with the same English words. The rule begins with the Chinese semantic units, verifies their approved Word mappings, and preserves their trace in canonical Chinglish before comparing the result with natural English. This order prevents English grammar from being mistaken for meaning that was present in the Chinese source.
The reviewed examples include I put item; we keep list; plan very complete. In each case, the sentence is already scheduled in an earlier production week. The examples therefore provide stable evidence rather than depending on content that is being published at the same moment as the rule. Editors can open each linked Sentence, inspect its full token mappings, and confirm that its source units, pinyin, Pattern and Natural English fields agree.
A canonical Chinglish sequence keeps one visible token for each approved source unit. English-only articles, agreement endings, plural endings, tense auxiliaries and copulas may appear in Natural English when required, but they do not automatically become new source tokens. Conversely, a meaningful Chinese unit must not be dropped simply because idiomatic English can leave it implicit. The mapping layer and the comparison layer have different jobs and must remain visibly separate.
This boundary matters for search, learning and maintenance. Stable mappings let related Words and Sentences point to the same semantic record, while the Natural English field remains free to be idiomatic. If an editor changes a title, source sentence, token sequence or mapping key, dependency review and both editorial passes must run again before scheduling. A surface similarity alone is not enough to reuse the rule.
The rule applies only when the linked mappings have the same roles and contextual meaning demonstrated by the examples. It does not authorize automatic generation across ambiguous senses, specialist contexts, figurative language or a different Pattern. When the evidence is incomplete, the content stays an approved or blocked Draft instead of being promoted. This cautious boundary is especially important in Week 6, because scheduled rules must remain later than all of their supporting Sentences.
During review, an editor should read the Chinese sentence aloud, compare the pinyin with every displayed unit, follow each token link, and then read the Natural English without looking at the canonical trace. That sequence catches missing units, accidental English word order, weak mappings and natural translations that have drifted in meaning. The reviewer should also confirm that the examples are meaningfully different, that the rule title answers a real learner question, and that the boundary explains when not to apply the rule. Search wording may improve clarity, but it must never broaden the approved mapping merely to capture more queries.
Incorrect use would copy an English grammatical form into the canonical sequence without a Chinese semantic source, remove a Chinese unit merely to sound more natural, or cite a same-week or later Sentence as evidence. The correct response is to keep the layers separate, repair the dependency, and rerun the mapping, Pattern, identity, visibility and editorial checks.
Correct Examples
- I put item
- we keep list
- plan very complete
Boundary
Do not add an English-only grammar word to the canonical trace or cite a same-week Sentence as evidence.