Fair on the first point. I would almost say that's too abstract for me, but I've definitely done similar dissections for my various games' touchstones, they've usually just been targeted---looking at 1 specific mechanic or system at a time rather than the game as a whole---and I (obviously) wasn't applying your theory to them. It's also good to get some clarification on prameya and danda as these aren't terms that I've encountered before.
On flow vs. look and DIY vs. dictated, however, I understood that you were trying to say a game (typically) isn't entirely 1 or the other, rather that its individual components are. My issue was that I didn't know how to turn that concept into a useable question. The example question you gave is a good direction, though.
What intentioned spaces are littered throughout the game (if any)? how do these affect the outputs?
I think that gets people thinking about a game in terms of components, as well as how those components individually affect play.