This paper proposes Translational Ontology, a meta-ontological framework that investigates the formal conditions under which ontological description is possible at all. Rather than advancing a new first-order inventory of what exists, the framework shifts the focus to the structural constraints presupposed by any ontological claim. The central thesis is that translation, understood in a formal and non-linguistic sense, is a necessary condition of describability. Ontological description presupposes difference, relation, and non-identity: what is described can never fully coincide with its description. From this starting point, the paper introduces a set of interconnected concepts—response, Qualions as minimal units of describability, Response Fields as loci of interaction, Translation Resistance as the formal impossibility of complete identity, and Homeostatic Regression as a dynamic constraint that preserves stability without teleology. To ground distinction itself, the paper articulates the notion of an Infinite Phase, a pre-distinct transcendental condition required for differentiation to arise. Hierarchical organization and multi-level description are explained through Shared Qualion Fields and Dual-Mode Existence, avoiding both reductionism and strong emergentism. The framework is further applied to dissolve the mind–body problem by reframing it as a category error arising from the conflation of descriptive modes with ontological kinds. Situated in dialogue with Kantian transcendental philosophy, process thought, and East Asian relational traditions, Translational Ontology offers a systematic account of why relational and non-substantialist ontologies recur across philosophical contexts. The result is not a new metaphysics of being, but a metaontology of describability that clarifies the formal conditions governing ontological discourse itself. This paper is intended as a conceptual preprint and does not present an empirical or testable theory.
Makoto Sueyoshi (Fri,) studied this question.