9.5.4 Repetition of details in 9.5.1

Between them the first para of 10.5.1 and clause 10.5.4 define **_unbound generic type_**, **_unbound type_**, **_constructed type_** and **_bound type_** - which are pairwise similar but slightly different. They also both make the point that an **_unbound [generic] type_** can only be used in a `typeof` expression.

This close repetition and definition of related terms seems clumsy.

The terms **_[un]bound type_** are only used once elsewhere in the Standard (§9.5.3, §16.4.2), so the added clause §10.5.4 with its clumsiness, is only to support those two uses.

I think it would be much better if these definitions occurred together and there was no repetition. Also should consider whether the terms are required, given their lack of use, or whether the clauses using them (§9.5.3, §16.4.2) might be written differently.