This paper proposes Resonant Cognitive Closure (RCC) as a structural framework for describing how meaning may become stabilized in interaction. RCC is introduced not as a neuroscientific theory, a psychological process model, or a mechanistic account of artificial systems, but as a conceptual framework for referring to bounded interpretive states that emerge through interactional organization. The framework addresses a descriptive gap in existing discussions of dialogue and meaning, where coherence, consistency, similarity, and task performance are often examined, but the stabilization of meaning itself is less explicitly defined as an object of analysis. RCC defines closure not as mere termination, final certainty, or absolute truth, but as a condition in which semantic fluctuation becomes increasingly constrained within a comparatively stable range through recurrent alignment in interaction. To describe this process, the framework distinguishes three analytical dimensions of stabilization: lexical, semantic, and conceptual. These dimensions are proposed not as fixed ontological layers, but as descriptive components through which different forms and depths of boundedness may be articulated. On this basis, closure is treated as a structurally bounded stabilization state that may be narrow or broad, rigid or flexible, shallow or deep, temporary or sustained. The paper also clarifies the positioning and limits of RCC. It does not claim mechanistic identity between human and artificial agents, nor does it provide an empirical metric or a normative model of good dialogue. Instead, RCC is defined at the level of structural comparability, allowing interactions across heterogeneous agents to be described in terms of analogous forms of bounded semantic organization without presupposing shared internal mechanisms. By fixing RCC as a conceptual reference point, this paper aims to establish a foundation for later observational, comparative, and computational work on meaning stabilization in interaction. In that sense, the contribution of RCC is foundational rather than final: it defines a structured problem space within which future empirical and analytical research may proceed with greater conceptual clarity.
Yuji K. Takahashi (Wed,) studied this question.