"borrowing" is used extensively before any explanation, especially in Capturing

The page on Capturing (fn/closures/capture.md) makes many references to borrowing to explain the semantics. But borrowing won't be explained for another six full sections.

(There are earlier references to borrowing as well, in primitives/array.md, custom_types/enum/testcase_linked_list.md, flow_control/for.md, and flow_control/match/destructuring/destructure_pointers.md. But those are fairly incidental, and easy to skim past while still getting the general gist of things. Not so with Capturing.)

I certainly don't think it would be a good idea to move the section on Scopes to someplace before Capturing. But I don't think it would hurt to add a short, basic explanation at an earlier point — maybe in Primitives? — noting that a full treatment will come later.

Alternatively, it might be a good idea to include at the very start a short discussion of what kind of language Rust is (or maybe why someone would want to learn Rust) … the goal of having both efficiency and safety, what safety means, and Rust's approach is to make the notion of ownership of data a first-class concept in the language. The term "borrowing" fits very naturally in such a discussion. That would also be a good place to actually explain & and *, which as far as I can tell are never explained at all.

(If that alternative suggestion is appealing, I'm happy to file a different issue just for that.)

Start with fn/closures/capture.md, then compare the earlier references in primitives/array.md, custom_types/enum/testcase_linked_list.md, flow_control/for.md, and flow_control/match/destructuring/destructure_pointers.md. Determine where an introductory explanation belongs and confirm that the chosen location gives readers enough context; done means the early borrowing references are understandable without prematurely moving the Scopes section.