It is worth repeating once more: I consider that the meaning of a term is a result of its concrete usage in a concrete utterance and that this meaning can be recovered through the explicit steps of  the analysis being applied to the texts. The purpose is not to search an essential sense to the terms, but to get the way they are being used.

Therefore, "inference" and "description" refer to the way the terms were used in concrete utterances of the corpus. No term is, in itself, inferential or descriptive. It is inferential or it is descriptive depending on how it was used in the considered utterances. Thus, when we are said that certain marks "resultan del (result from) astillamiento, this term, "astillamiento", refers to an action, which is inferred, while the marks are described. But, if we are said that "el astillamiento que presenta esta pieza fue producido por el uso" (the "astillamiento" of this tool was produced using the tool"), "astillamiento" is used descriptively and the inference is related to the use of the tool. This example also indicates the need to adjusting the language of lithic analysis.