x_{1} is meta to/an example of x_{2} that describes such an object/concept/notion/system/topic/etc., being meta in property/aspect x_{3}, and which has features x_{4}, governed by/considered in system/considerations/epistemology/theory x_{5}; x_{1} is meta (a particular type of abstraction of x_{2} so as to apply to itself in some sense); x_{1} is an/a piece of/an example of x_{2} that applies fractally thereto

Does not (necessarily) mean "beyond", "after", "beside"; in some (rather pictoral) senses, these meanings may be necessary but not sufficient for being meta in this sense; thus, "metaphysics" should not be translated using this word. x1 is an object, notion, topic, system, etc. which applies to x2 but which is itself an example thereof; for example, the meanings of the words "metalinguistics" and "metadata" are meta in this sense. It is not necessarily directly self-referential, but could be fractally applicative. x1 is an X that is about (another) X; x1 is an abstraction of X so as to apply to X. x1 does not necessarily abstract [from] (in one sense), but is abstract to, x2. See also: xulta (generalized/weaker), sucta.

- praperi
- x
_{1}is a strict/proper sub-x_{2}[structure] in/of x_{3}; x_{2}is a structure and x_{1}and x_{3}are both examples of that structure x_{2}such that x_{1}is entirely contained within x_{3}(where containment is defined according to the standard/characteristics/definition of x_{2}; but in any case, no member/part/element that belongs to x_{1}does not also belong to x_{3}), but there is some member/part/element of x_{3}that does not belong to x_{1}in the same way.