Meaning as Binding

This paper proposes an operational relational ontology in which meaning is not exhausted by intrinsic object properties or unconstrained mental projection but is constituted through bindings among interpreters, artifacts, references, practices, authorities, and contexts. A binding is a typed, scoped, temporally situated relation. Its existence does not establish truth, legitimacy, fidelity, or usefulness; those require separate evaluation. The paper distinguishes four questions often collapsed in semantic systems: whether a binding exists, whether it is exactly anchored to a source, whether it is admissible under a declared regime, and whether it is a high-quality binding for a stated purpose. Meaning-inertia describes resistance to revision produced by dependency and reinforcement, but high inertia can indicate either legitimate structural integration or harmful lock-in. Binding quality is therefore multidimensional rather than a single universal score. The current computational placement is the Governed Meaning Base (GMB), following the author-confirmed lineage CCF -> CMB -> GMB. Exact-source overlays, semantic hashes, MCIR forms, receipts, and governed mutation can make bindings inspectable. They cannot manufacture semantic correctness merely by being present. In particular, verbatim overlay discipline proves textual anchoring, not entailment, interpretation quality, authority, or truth. The result is a candidate ontology and evaluation program spanning philosophical meaning, governed knowledge, and constitutional computing. It remains subject to external literature comparison and empirical testing; the oscillatory and phase-coherence language is retained only as a provisional analogy unless a measurable model is supplied.