Concretize

Replace jargon and imported metaphors in the target with concrete language: name what is actually there, keep the terms the domain itself uses, and drop borrowed figures of speech that the reader must translate back into meaning.

Target

jj show --git

Arguments: $ARGUMENTS

Concretize the target named in the arguments if given; otherwise the code or prose changed in the current commit shown above; if there are no arguments and the commit has no changes, ask the user what to concretize and stop.

Principles

• Name the thing, not a picture of it. A metaphor borrows a word from another domain to gesture at meaning, and the reader must translate the picture back. Replace it with the plain term for the real thing: a "seam" is a boundary, a "load-bearing" call is a required one.
• The domain's own words stay. A term the field uses in its specs and docs is not jargon to strip; it is the concrete name. "Socket", "stream", "deadlock", "idempotent", "quorum" earn their place even though each began as a metaphor. The test: would a practitioner write this word in a precise spec, or only in a blog post? Keep the first kind; cut the second.
• Plain over fancy, even within the domain. When two correct terms fit, pick the one a newcomer to the team understands. Don't reach for the rarer or grander word when it buys no precision; complexity is worth it only when it names a distinction the simpler word would lose.
• Concretize, don't change meaning. Replacing a word must preserve the claim. If a metaphor is carrying a real distinction no plain term captures, keep it and say why rather than flatten the meaning.

These principles double as the test for a replacement: make one only when the result is more concrete AND says the same thing. They aren't exhaustive; reason from first principles when none fits cleanly.

Workflow

1. Read the whole target once so you understand what it actually refers to before renaming anything. For code, note how to run its tests or typecheck.
2. Find the candidates: jargon, imported metaphors, and needlessly fancy terms (see "What to replace"). Most words are fine; that's expected.
3. For each candidate, decide with the principles: is it the domain's own term (keep), or borrowed decoration (replace with the concrete name)? When unsure whether a word is domain vocabulary, check how the surrounding code and docs use it before cutting.
4. If nothing should change, tell the user and stop. Don't manufacture edits.
5. Apply the changes:
   • In prose and comments, edit the wording in place.
   • For an identifier built on a metaphor, rename it. Treat this as a behavior-preserving rename: update every reference, and never change a name that callers outside the target depend on without restoring the public name.
6. If you renamed any code, run the covering tests or a typecheck to confirm behavior is unchanged. Pure prose edits need no test run.
7. Report what changed: each term replaced and the concrete word it became, and any metaphor you deliberately kept because it is the domain's term or carries a distinction no plain word does.

What to replace

• Imported metaphors that decorate rather than name. "seam", "load-bearing", "surface area", "blast radius", "north star", "first-class citizen", "the crux", "in the weeds", "table stakes", "move the needle", "boil the ocean", "heavy lift". Each names something concrete: a boundary, a required dependency, the exposed API, the scope of impact, the goal, fully supported, the key part.
• Verbs used as filler. "leverage" is "use"; "surface" (as a verb) is "show" or "report"; "unpack" is "explain". Plain verbs say the same thing.
• Fancy words that buy no precision. "utilize" is "use", "facilitate" is "help", "myriad" is "many". Prefer the short, common word unless the long one names a real distinction.
• Vague abstractions standing in for a concrete referent. "handle the data", "do the processing", "manage the state" name nothing; say what the code does to what. This often points at a rename or extraction, which you should use /stratify for.

What to keep

• Domain terms that began as metaphors but are now the field's precise vocabulary: "socket", "stream", "thread", "port", "tree", "branch", "deadlock", "handshake", "garbage collection". These are concrete to anyone in the domain.
• A metaphor that carries a distinction no plain term captures. If replacing it would lose real meaning, keep it. Note why in your report.
• Terms of art the project already uses consistently, even if you'd pick different words. Concretizing should not fork the project's vocabulary; if a whole vocabulary needs aligning, then you should use /ubiquitize-language.
• Anything you don't fully understand. Investigate or leave it; don't guess a word away and lose its meaning.

Fixing mistakes

• A test or typecheck breaks after a rename: a reference was missed or the name is used outside the target. Find the other references or restore the original name.
• A replacement reads less clearly than the metaphor: the metaphor was doing real work. Put it back and note it as a deliberate keep.