For those who have a hard time accepting that analytical methods have a vocabulary that differs from the vernacular, let's compare the use of words from critical document analysis (as used in Biblical study) and note the differences between vernacular usage (marked with a "v") and the critical document usage (marked "d"). We already compared...
1. MYTH: v. False story. d. Origin narrative.
2. FABLE: v. Fictitious tale. d. An apalogue or short story with a moral.
3. LEGEND: v. A popularly believed story that cannot be verified. d. A moral derived from the character of a historical person, usually set in a novela or fictional setting.
4. NOVELA: v. Short fictional story or a serial "soap opera," popular in Latin television. d. A legend based on a historical person or event, set in a particular genre that works as a device to tell the story
5. APOCALYPTIC: v. Having to do with the end of the world or a destructive end in general. d. A narrative genre in which political critique or intrigue are disguised as symbolic oracles (prophecies) from a divine source.
This is the way methodologies work. They have a language all their own. Often methodologies are using terms in their original sense whereas vernacular speech takes them and gives them a secondary meaning, "apocalyptic" being a popular example.
Some may not like the fact that analytical methods use terminology in ways that differ from the vernacular, but this has been the way of speech for generations. Languages generally have a "formal" means of address and a more relaxed "common" speech.