What's inline or static saves me some embarrassment but causes some, too. An author talked to a girl, Alice, and much intrigue was the result. I have no shame in saying my first love called me Alice. I'm a disobedient child: as recently as plans got upset by what some will call a plandemic, I was told I couldn't have loved one who had neither kept house for me (or with me), called me by anything other than my Christian name, or tried to domesticate me.
Or lead me on? Ask her!
With any luck that'll grab the attention of a girl who can't help thinking other kids are slow: 'childhood sweetheart' is nothing but an insult from people who are out of our league. My explanations of things that were new to me, and things that were happening at the time, is something that Alice yet pulls me up about.
'My poor head!'
The embarrassment--which is a word I had to correct myself about by reading stuffy old books--is that 'static' does the job. But 'inline' might be an improvement. The problem is the taking of words out of our mouths that 'reserved' implies. The idea of starting a new language ignores the second language that the first can't do without. I might well have used that second language instead of 'static,' but what's academic?
The letter n, capitalized, is significant to me in a way which I might try to explain, but I'd need to see the toxic or intoxicating look on your faces.
Time to make shift. This is intrinsically inheritable and I'll give it eff-eff so's it's ready with all the other attributes that get added to the book.
Until they make another?