Linguistic Gap Analysis — Psalms (Full Book) — English → Arabic

Purpose and Method

This document executes Phase 1 Step 8 for the Psalms curriculum: identifying where Arabic (Modern Standard Arabic, Van Dyck/NAV Christian register) has genuine vocabulary gaps, where it has too much vocabulary crowding a single semantic space with competing Islamic-theological referents, and where transliteration is preferable to translation. It extends, and must not contradict, translation_memory.json and bible_term_registry.json (Romans baseline) and is aligned with 08_core_glossary.md (Psalms). All risk tiers use the Critical/High/Medium/Low framework fixed in doctrine_risk_registry.json.

Coverage spans the full 150 psalms. Rather than treat each psalm individually, psalms are grouped by genre/doctrine cluster per the standard Psalter typology (lament, praise, wisdom, royal/messianic, thanksgiving, imprecatory, historical, pilgrimage/Songs of Ascent) so that every chapter is accounted for even where a psalm contributes no new lexical risk. Groupings with no new terms are explicitly marked “reviewed — no new vocabulary risk” rather than omitted.

---

Part 1 — Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

For each of the eight curriculum doctrines: the available Arabic term(s), their specific weaknesses in this destination culture, and the recommended handling strategy.

1. The Character of God as Shepherd, King, and Refuge

Sub-concept	Available Arabic Term(s)	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
Shepherd	الراعي	Positive pastoral image exists in Arabic culture and pre-Islamic poetry, but Islamic tanzīh theology supplies no comparable personal, individually-directed divine care image — Allah’s care is typically framed through law and provision (rizq), not intimate tending.	Retain الراعي; pair every doctrine-anchor occurrence (Ps 23; 78:70-72; 80:1; 95:7; 100:3) with explicit teaching of the personal, singular-object relationship (“my Shepherd,” not merely “the world’s Provider”).
King (Divine Kingship)	الملك	Direct overlap with Al-Malik (Allah’s 99 names) is a genuine bridge, but risks being read as a static honorific attribute rather than Psalms’ active, historical, unfolding reign (“YHWH mālak” cluster: 47, 93, 95–99).	Use الملك consistently; teach with active verbs (“يملك,” “قد ملك”) to preserve the historical-enthronement register, not a frozen title.
Refuge/Rock/Fortress	ملجأ / صخرة / حصن	No independent collision, but risk of flattening three distinct Hebrew images (machaseh, tsur, metsudah) into one generic Arabic “safety” word, losing the psalms’ deliberate image-stacking (Ps 18; 91).	Preserve three distinct Arabic terms consistently; flag translators against synonym-substitution for poetic variety, since consistency here supports later typological linkage (rock → cornerstone, Ps 118:22).
Almighty / Most High	القدير / العلي	Both overlap directly with Allah’s 99 names (Al-Qadīr, Al-‘Alī) — a genuine positive bridge, but risk of the reader assuming these titles are interchangeable generic descriptors rather than titles that Luke 1:32 and other NT texts apply specifically to Christ.	Retain; add cross-reference notes at Ps 91:1 and 47:2 pointing forward to the NT application to Jesus.

2. Lament and Honest Prayer

Sub-concept	Available Arabic Term(s)	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
Lament / complaint before God	لا يوجد مصطلح تقني واحد؛ يُترجم وصفيًا (“الصراخ,” “الشكوى,” “النوح”)	No single fixed Arabic theological term exists for “lament” as a legitimate prayer genre; “الشكوى” (complaint) carries a mildly negative connotation of grumbling in everyday Arabic and in popular piety (both Christian and Muslim), where patient acceptance (sabr/رضا) is the valorized posture and voiced protest to God can read as a lack of faith.	No new glossary term is required, but a doctrinal framing note must accompany every lament psalm (3, 6, 13, 22, 42–43, 44, 60, 74, 79, 80, 88, 89, 102, 109, 130, 137, 142) explaining that honest complaint addressed directly to God is itself an act of covenant trust, not its absence — a genuine gap requiring paraphrastic scaffolding rather than a missing single word.
Divine abandonment cry	تركتني (Ps 22:1)	Vocabulary itself is not missing, but the concept of God abandoning his own suffering righteous one collides with a broader cultural expectation (shared across Christian and Muslim popular piety in the region) that divine favor should be visible and immediate; also intersects with the crucifixion-denial apologetic (see Part 4).	See 08_core_glossary.md “azavtani” entry; treat as Critical, mandatory theologian review, cross-referenced to Matthew 27:46.
Imprecatory psalms (calls for judgment)	لا يوجد مصطلح جديد	No vocabulary gap, but a pastoral gap: imprecatory psalms (35, 58, 69, 83, 109, 137) risk being read either as license for personal vengeance or, in a region with active intercommunal conflict, as endorsing violence against named ethnic/political groups.	Flag Ps 137 and 109 for native-speaker + theologian review; require a framing note distinguishing covenant-lawsuit imagery, entrusted to God alone, from any human calls to violence. Reviewed — no new lexical item required beyond existing “israel”/“peace” cautions already in the core glossary.

3. Praise and Worship

Sub-concept	Available Arabic Term(s)	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
Prostration / worship posture	يسجد	Genuine positive shared vocabulary (root س-ج-د shared with Islamic sujūd) — a rare case where the crowded neighborhood is an asset rather than a risk.	Use freely; the fencing needed is conceptual (object of worship: Triune God through Christ) not lexical.
Hallelujah / praise formulas	هللويا (established transliteration); يسبّح / تسبيح for “praise/to praise”	No gap; both terms already established in Arabic Christian liturgical use.	Reviewed — no new vocabulary risk. Retain baseline transliteration standard.
Musical instruments cluster	بوق، عود، قيثارة، دف، مزمار، صنوج	No doctrinal collision; purely descriptive/cultural vocabulary.	Reviewed — no new vocabulary risk (Psalm 150, 33, 92, 98, 149).

4. Messianic Prophecy in the Psalms

Sub-concept	Available Arabic Term(s)	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
Messiah/Anointed	المسيح	Pre-loaded with the Quranic ‘Isa al-Masih narrative (honored prophet, not divine, not crucified, not risen) per baseline.	REUSED per baseline; every Psalms occurrence (2, 20, 45, 89, 110, 132) must actively correct, not merely use, the pre-loaded content.
YHWH/Adonai distinction (Ps 110:1)	الرب used for both referents; no native Arabic device preserves the English capitalization convention	This is the single deepest structural gap in the entire curriculum: Arabic possesses no orthographic mechanism equivalent to LORD/Lord capitalization, and the entire Matthew 22:41-45 Christological argument depends on the reader detecting two distinct referents in one Hebrew verse.	Mandatory bracketed/footnoted gloss at first occurrence: “الرب [يهوه] لسيدي [أدوناي].” This is a paraphrase-plus-annotation solution, not a lexical one — flag as requiring permanent apparatus (footnote), not a one-time translator note, because the ambiguity cannot be resolved by word choice alone.
”Your throne, O God” (Ps 45:6)	عرشك يا الله	No lexical gap — the words translate directly and accurately — but the theological content (a human king addressed with the divine name) has no polite off-ramp in Arabic; any softening (“كأنك إله”) would falsify the text.	Render literally and directly; treat any impulse to soften as a translation error, not a stylistic choice.
Cornerstone / rejected stone	حجر الزاوية	Established rendering exists; risk is not vocabulary but readers missing the “necessary divine plan, not tragedy” frame given Quran 4:157.	Reviewed against baseline resurrection-apologetic pattern; pair with explicit “foreordained, not accidental” framing at every occurrence (118:22 and its NT citations).
Pierced (Ps 22:16)	ثقبوا	Genuine textual-critical variant, not a vocabulary gap; the Masoretic “like a lion” (כארי) versus the traditional Christian “pierced” (כארו) reading is a manuscript decision inherited from the established Bible-translation tradition.	Follow Van Dyck/NAV tradition (ثقبوا); document the textual basis in a translator’s note; mandatory theologian sign-off given the apologetic weight against crucifixion denial.

5. Confession and Forgiveness (Psalm 51)

Sub-concept	Available Arabic Term(s)	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
Sin-vocabulary triad (chet/pesha/avon)	الخطية / معصية / إثم	Arabic has ample vocabulary for sin, arguably a crowded neighborhood rather than a gap — the risk is collapsing three deliberately stacked Hebrew terms into one Arabic word for rhetorical convenience.	Fence each term to a fixed Hebrew referent across the whole curriculum (not just Psalm 51): الخطية = chet, معصية = pesha, إثم = avon. Do not permit interchangeable substitution across documents.
Forgiveness imagery (blot out/cover/carry)	يمحو / يستر / يحمل	No gap; risk is the reverse — three vivid Hebrew images could be smoothed into a single generic “يغفر” for fluency, losing the imagery Paul directly exploits in Romans 4:7-8.	Preserve all three verbs distinctly; flag as a direct cross-reference to the baseline’s Critical “justification”/“imputed_righteousness” doctrines — Psalm 32 must read as visibly the same doctrine Romans 4 later expounds.
Ritual-purity vocabulary applied morally (Ps 51:7)	يطهّر	Baseline generally avoids ritual-purity vocabulary for holiness (favoring مقدس’s relational sense over طاهر’s wudu-adjacent ritual sense); Psalm 51 is the one place this general caution must be suspended.	Explicit exception note in Phase 2 instructions: طهّر/يطهّر is correct here because Psalm 51’s own poetic vehicle is deliberately ritual-cleansing imagery repurposed for moral renewal — translators must not “correct” it toward a purely relational term.

6. The Righteous and the Wicked (Psalm 1)

Sub-concept	Available Arabic Term(s)	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
Righteous (tsaddiq)	الصدّيق / البر (root)	البر’s Quranic checklist-of-deeds resonance (Q 2:177) is already Critical in the baseline; Psalm 1’s own fruit/tree metaphor for the righteous person independently reinforces a works-checklist reading even before any Quranic association is considered.	Double caution required: teach explicitly that the tree metaphor describes fruit flowing from delight in torah/covenant relationship, not the root cause of righteous standing; resolve fully only with reference to Psalm 32/51 and ultimately Romans.
Wicked (rasha)	الشرير	No collision; straightforward antonym pairing.	Reviewed — no new vocabulary risk beyond consistent pairing with tsaddiq across Psalms 1, 37, 73, 112.
Blessed (state) vs. blessed (agent-conferred)	طوبى لـ / مبارك	Both Arabic terms exist and are usable, but everyday and even some devotional Arabic usage tends to collapse them into a single “مبارك/طوبى” register, losing the distinction between a declared flourishing condition (ashrei, Ps 1:1) and an agent’s conferred blessing (barukh, Ps 118:26, quoted at Jesus’ triumphal entry).	Fence the two terms permanently: طوبى لـ reserved for ashrei-type declarations, مبارك reserved for barukh-type agent blessing, enforced across the whole Psalter, not just Psalm 1.

7. Covenant Faithfulness (Hesed)

Sub-concept	Available Arabic Term(s)	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
Hesed (covenant loyal love)	الرحمة	This is the highest-stakes crowded neighborhood in the whole curriculum: الرحمة is also the root of Ar-Raḥmān/Ar-Raḥīm, Allah’s paramount Quranic name-pair, understood there as sovereign, non-covenantal, universally-extended compassion, not a self-binding oath-loyalty to a particular covenant partner.	Retain الرحمة per established Bible-translation tradition (do not coin a novel term — that would break continuity with the wider Arabic Bible corpus learners will also read), but mandate the qualifying phrase “رحمته الثابتة بحسب عهده” at every doctrine-anchor occurrence, with theologian review at each. This is a fencing problem, not a missing-vocabulary problem.
Rachum v’chanun formula	رحيم ورؤوف	Near-verbatim cognate overlap with the Quran’s own “Ghafūr Raḥīm” and Ar-Raḥmān Ar-Raḥīm formulas — deepest genuine Semitic cognate collision in the curriculum.	Render as a fixed compound distinct from single-word الرحمة (used for chesed alone), so the two Hebrew concepts remain visibly separate in Arabic; mandatory theologian teaching note every occurrence (86:15; 103:8; 111:4; 112:4; 116:5; 145:8) emphasizing covenant particularity against Islamic universal raḥmah.
Emet (faithfulness/truth)	الحق / الأمانة	Al-Ḥaqq is a compatible divine name; low independent risk, but must not be rendered inconsistently across the fixed chesed-emet word pair.	Fix الحق as the standing partner-term to الرحمة in every chesed-emet pairing (25:10; 40:11; 85:10; 89:14; 138:2); do not vary with الأمانة mid-curriculum.
Ga’al / Padah (kinsman-redemption/ransom)	الفادي / فداء	No lexical gap (fidā’ is standard Arabic for ransom), but the underlying doctrine collides directly with Quran 6:164’s denial that one soul may bear/ransom another’s burden — a doctrinal gap disguised as a vocabulary non-issue.	Treat as Critical regardless of translation ease; every occurrence needs the same apologetic scaffolding the baseline requires for “salvation,” not just accurate word choice.

8. Kingship and the Messianic King (Psalms 2 and 110)

Sub-concept	Available Arabic Term(s)	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
Son (Ps 2:7)	ابن (within ابن الله)	Same Critical collision as baseline “son_of_god” — Quran 112:3, 19:35.	REUSED; no deviation; Psalm 2:7 flagged as a primary NT-quoted anchor text (Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5).
Priest-King (Melchizedek pattern)	كاهن + ملكي صادق	Sunni Islam has no ordained mediating priesthood; كاهن risks evoking pre-Islamic Arabian soothsayer-priests (kāhin) condemned in early Islamic tradition — a genuine false-friend risk, not merely an absence.	Always pair كاهن with explicit teaching that Christ’s priesthood (after “the order of Melchizedek,” non-Levitical, office not lineage) is exclusive, perfect, and final — closing off, not opening, a class of ongoing human priestly mediators.
YHWH/Adonai distinction (Ps 110:1)	See Part 4/Messianic Prophecy above	Structural orthographic gap.	See above; single highest-priority footnote apparatus decision in the curriculum.

---

Part 2 — Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

A. Genuine Missing Vocabulary (no adequate single Arabic term exists)

1. Lament as a legitimate prayer genre. Arabic has no fixed theological noun equivalent to “lament” that carries the positive sense of faith-filled protest rather than complaint/impatience. Strategy: supply descriptive paraphrase plus a recurring doctrinal framing note across all lament psalms rather than force a single-word coinage.
2. The English LORD/Lord (YHWH/Adonai) typographic distinction. No Arabic orthographic convention exists to mark this. Strategy: bracketed/footnoted gloss, permanent apparatus, not a translator’s one-time note (see Part 1, Messianic Prophecy).
3. Chasid as distinct from qadosh. Arabic القدّيس/مقدس naturally absorbs both the “set apart” (qadosh) and “covenant-loyal” (chasid) senses into one semantic field, but Psalm 16:10’s argument (quoted in Acts 2:27) specifically trades on chasid’s covenant-loyalty nuance. Strategy: coin a distinguishing compound (القدّيس المختار) with a mandatory translator’s note, per the core glossary; flag as Critical given its resurrection-apologetic load.
4. Nephesh’s holistic “whole living self” sense, as opposed to a soul/body dualism. Arabic النفس is available but arrives already embedded in a well-developed Islamic moral psychology (nafs al-ammārah/al-lawwāmah/al-muṭma’innah) that has no Hebrew counterpart. Strategy: use النفس but explicitly instruct against importing the graded Islamic nafs-framework; treat this as a false-friend risk (see Crowded Neighborhoods below) as much as a gap.

B. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing

These are cases where Arabic vocabulary is abundant but multiple English/Hebrew concepts collapse onto the same word(s), or where an available Arabic word is already claimed by a well-developed competing Islamic theological structure.

Arabic Term	Competing Claimants	Fencing Requirement
الرحمة	Hesed (covenant loyalty) and Ar-Raḥmān/Ar-Raḥīm (Allah’s universal compassion) and generic English “mercy”	Reserve for hesed contexts with mandatory qualifying phrase; never let it silently absorb the distinct rachum v’chanun formula (below) or generic “mercy” without a covenant-specific anchor.
رحيم ورؤوف	Rachum v’chanun and the Quran’s own “Ghafūr Raḥīm”/Ar-Raḥmān Ar-Raḥīm formulas	Must remain visibly distinct from single-word الرحمة (hesed); mandatory theologian note every occurrence framing this as God’s particular covenant self-revelation, not raḥmah’s universal scope.
البر	tsedeq/tsedaqah (righteousness as covenant gift/guidance) and Quranic al-birr (checklist of pious deeds, Q 2:177) and Psalm 1’s fruit-based righteous-person description	Triple collision — the deepest fencing requirement in the curriculum alongside hesed. Every occurrence must carry the “gift/fruit, not ground” teaching note; never allow standalone use without this framing in Psalms 1, 15, 24, 32, 51.
النفس	Nephesh (whole living self, God’s object of care) and Islamic nafs-psychology (graded self, object of the believer’s own moral struggle)	Explicit instruction against importing the tripartite Islamic nafs schema; nephesh in Psalms is passive/cared-for, not the active moral battleground nafs discourse implies.
الشركة	koinōnia (shared participation in Christ) and root-resonance with shirk (associating partners with God)	REUSED baseline caution; extend to Psalm 133’s “dwelling together in unity” (yachad) — avoid pairing with vocabulary suggesting “partnership with God” in the shirk sense.
كاهن	kohen (dignified OT mediating office, fulfilled and closed in Christ) and pre-Islamic kāhin (soothsayer-priest, condemned in early Islamic tradition)	Must always be paired with explicit “exclusive, perfect, final” framing so the term is not misheard as reviving a discredited pagan-Arabian religious office.
السلام	Shalom (covenantal wholeness, Ps 122:6 “peace of Jerusalem”) and contemporary Arabic political usage around the Israeli-Palestinian peace process	Same caution as baseline “israel”; teach Psalm 122 as an ancient covenantal prayer, explicitly not a comment on the present conflict.
إسرائيل	Covenant people (Jacob’s descendants, corporate lament/praise subject) and the modern nation-state, an unavoidable contemporary political referent in spoken/media Arabic	Deliberate pastoral framing required at every Psalms occurrence, intensified beyond the baseline’s Romans-only caution by Psalm 137’s exile lament, which risks a doubly-loaded contemporary reading (“Israel” and “Babylon” both carry present political resonance).

---

Part 3 — Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Item	Decision	Rationale
Proper names (David, Moses, Isaiah, Jerusalem, Zion, Melchizedek)	Transliterate using established Van Dyck/NAV Christian forms (داود، موسى، إشعياء، أورشليم، صهيون، ملكي صادق)	Consistency with baseline transliteration standards; no viable paraphrase alternative and none needed.
Sheol	Transliterate-adjacent established term الهاوية, never paraphrase as “hell” (جهنم)	جهنم imports a developed judgment/damnation theology absent from Sheol’s general realm-of-the-dead sense; a paraphrase toward “hell” would be a doctrinal error, not a stylistic one.
Selah, Maskil, Miktam (Hebrew musical/liturgical notations)	Transliterate (سِلاه، مسكيل، مكتام) with a brief explanatory gloss at first occurrence rather than paraphrase into a functional English-style heading	These terms have uncertain precise meaning even in Hebrew scholarship; paraphrasing would overclaim certainty. Established Arabic Bible tradition transliterates rather than translates these.
Hesed	Paraphrase-with-qualifier (الرحمة + “الثابتة بحسب عهده”), not transliteration	Unlike Selah, hesed is a load-bearing theological concept that must communicate meaning to the reader directly; a bare transliteration (“חֶסֶד”) would be opaque and defeat the doctrine’s pastoral purpose.
YHWH/Adonai distinction (Ps 110:1)	Paraphrase-plus-bracketed-transliteration: الرب [يهوه] لسيدي [أدوناي]	Neither pure translation (الرب/الرب, indistinguishable) nor pure transliteration (unreadable to the general audience) alone solves the problem; the hybrid preserves both readability and the two-referent distinction the NT argument requires.
Abba (already in baseline)	Retain transliteration أبّا per baseline; no Psalms-specific change	Consistency across curricula; Psalms does not independently use this term but the same intimacy-register principle applies to Psalm 103:13’s Father-simile.
Amen, Hallelujah	Retain established transliterations آمين، هللويا	Already fixed by baseline; no deviation.
Melchizedek	Transliterate ملكي صادق, not paraphrase as “righteous king”	Established Christian Arabic convention; paraphrasing would obscure the proper-name/typological-office dual function the term carries into Hebrews.
Chasid	Paraphrase with compound + note (القدّيس المختار), not transliteration	A bare transliteration would be meaningless to the reader and would forfeit the deliberate distinction from qadosh (مقدس) that the doctrine requires be visible in translation, not only in a footnote.

---

Part 4 — Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × collision depth × frequency across the curriculum):

1. Hesed → الرحمة (Covenant Faithfulness). The single most consequential ambiguity: an unavoidable, tradition-mandated Arabic word that is simultaneously Allah’s paramount Quranic name-pair root, occurring at the curriculum’s core passage itself (Psalm 23:6) and at least ten other doctrine-anchor psalms. Critical; mandatory theologian review at every occurrence.
2. YHWH/Adonai indistinguishability in الرب (Psalm 110:1). A structural, not lexical, gap with direct load on the NT’s own Christological argument (Matthew 22:41-45) and on the baseline’s Lordship-of-Christ doctrine. Critical; mandatory footnote apparatus.
3. Rachum v’chanun → رحيم ورؤوف (Covenant Faithfulness / Character of God). Deepest genuine cognate overlap with Islamic divine-name formulas anywhere in either curriculum (Romans or Psalms); risk of readers assuming full theological equivalence with Ar-Raḥmān Ar-Raḥīm. Critical; recurring at six major psalms.
4. Tsaddiq/Psalm 1 righteousness → البر / الصدّيق (Righteous and Wicked). Compounds the baseline’s existing Critical البر risk with Psalm 1’s own independent fruit-based-righteousness rhetoric, doubling the works-checklist collision risk before any Quranic association is even considered.
5. Ga’al/Padah → الفادي / فداء (Covenant Faithfulness / Messianic Prophecy). Vocabulary itself is unproblematic, but the underlying substitutionary-bearing-of-another’s-burden doctrine directly contradicts Quran 6:164; risk of translators treating this as a “safe” term because it is lexically uncontested.
6. Sheol → الهاوية vs. جهنم. A single wrong word choice would import an entire judgment-theology absent from the source text and blur the specific resurrection argument tied to Psalm 16:10.
7. Kohen → كاهن (Kingship/Messianic Prophecy). False-friend risk via the pre-Islamic kāhin (soothsayer) association, compounded by the absence of any Sunni mediating-priesthood category to anchor the concept.
8. Chasid → القدّيس المختار vs. مقدس (Messianic Prophecy/Resurrection). Risk of collapsing two distinct Hebrew holiness-concepts into one Arabic word, silently weakening the Acts 2:27 resurrection argument’s textual basis.
9. Pierced (Ps 22:16) — textual-critical variant, not vocabulary choice. Risk is procedural (skipping mandatory theologian sign-off) rather than lexical, but the apologetic stakes against crucifixion denial are equally severe.
10. Israel/Babylon contemporary political loading (Ps 137, 122). Risk of the whole corporate-lament genre being read as commentary on present Middle East politics rather than ancient covenant history; compounds the baseline’s existing “israel” caution across many more occurrences than Romans alone.
11. Lament genre paraphrase gap. Lower doctrinal centrality than items 1-10 but very high frequency (roughly a third of the Psalter); risk of systematic softening of legitimate protest-prayer into generic praise-adjacent language across dozens of psalms if not deliberately guarded.
12. Nephesh → النفس vs. Islamic nafs-psychology. Risk of subtly re-theologizing Psalm 23:3 and similar restoration language into a self-mastery framework foreign to the text.

---

Part 5 — Full-Book Coverage Confirmation

The following psalm groupings were reviewed for new lexical/doctrinal gap risk. Groupings not generating new vocabulary items beyond those already addressed above are marked “reviewed — no new vocabulary risk,” consistent with the full-book-coverage mandate.

• Psalms 1–2: Load-bearing (Righteous/Wicked; Kingship/Messianic King) — addressed above.
• Psalms 3–7, 12–14, 25–28, 35, 38–40, 42–43, 54–57, 59–61, 64, 69–71, 86, 88, 102, 109, 120, 130, 140–143: Individual/communal lament cluster — addressed under Lament and Honest Prayer (Part 1 §2); no new lexical items beyond the genre-level paraphrase gap already flagged.
• Psalm 8: ben-adam (Son of Man idiom) — addressed above (Christology bridge term, High risk, cross-referenced to Messianic Prophecy).
• Psalms 15, 24: Reviewed — reinforce Righteous/Wicked and Kingship vocabulary already addressed; no independently new terms.
• Psalm 16: chasid, Sheol — addressed above (Critical).
• Psalms 18–19, 62, 95: Rock/Refuge cluster and Torah-synonym cluster (Ps 19) — addressed above.
• Psalm 22: azavtani, pierced — addressed above (Critical).
• Psalm 23: Core passage — shepherd, nephesh, righteousness-paths, tsalmavet, hesed, house of the LORD — all addressed above; no residual gap beyond items already flagged.
• Psalms 29–34, 65–68, 75–77, 92–93, 95–100, 103–106, 111–118, 121, 123–129, 131, 133–136, 138–139, 144–150: Praise/thanksgiving/wisdom/pilgrimage cluster — reviewed; vocabulary drawn from Praise and Worship, Character of God, and Covenant Faithfulness sections above (esp. the chesed/emet/rachum v’chanun formula recurring at 100, 103, 111, 112, 116, 118, 136, 145). No new terms beyond those catalogued.
• Psalm 32: Forgiveness imagery triad (machah/kasah/nasa) — addressed above.
• Psalm 37, 73, 112: tsaddiq/rasha reinforcement — addressed above; no new terms.
• Psalm 45: kis’akha Elohim (“Your throne, O God”) — addressed above (Critical).
• Psalm 46, 91: Refuge/Shaddai cluster — addressed above.
• Psalm 47, 93: “YHWH mālak” kingship formula — addressed under King (Part 1 §1).
• Psalm 49: padah (ransom) — addressed above.
• Psalm 51: Full sin-vocabulary triad, forgiveness imagery, taher — addressed above (core doctrine passage for Confession and Forgiveness).
• Psalms 72, 87, 117: Gentile-inclusion trajectory (goyim) — reviewed against baseline “gentiles”/“unity_of_jews_and_gentiles”; no new lexical item, but flag the Psalm 2 (rebellion) → Psalm 72/87/117 (inclusion) arc as a teaching continuity point.
• Psalm 78: David as shepherd-king, historical recital — reviewed; reinforces shepherd/covenant vocabulary already addressed; no new terms.
• Psalm 80: Shepherd of Israel imagery — reviewed, reinforces Part 1 §1.
• Psalm 84: chen/chanan (grace) — addressed above under Grace extension.
• Psalm 85, 89: emet/chesed pairing; covenant-lament tension (Davidic covenant apparently failing) — addressed above (Covenant risk elevated to High per core glossary).
• Psalm 90: Wisdom/mortality meditation — reviewed; no new theological vocabulary beyond standard mortality language already well-attested in Arabic religious literature (broadly compatible, Low risk).
• Psalm 91: Refuge/Shaddai/Elyon cluster — addressed above.
• Psalm 94, 101: Reviewed — reinforce Righteous/Wicked and Kingship vocabulary; no new terms.
• Psalm 107: ga’al (redemption) — addressed above.
• Psalm 110: yhwh_adoni distinction, kohen, Melchizedek — addressed above (highest-priority Critical cluster).
• Psalm 119: Torah-synonym cluster — addressed above under Character of God/Righteous-Wicked support vocabulary.
• Psalm 122, 137: Jerusalem/exile political-sensitivity cluster — addressed above (Part 2B, Part 4 #10).
• Psalm 132: Davidic covenant/messiah cluster — reviewed; reinforces existing Messianic Prophecy vocabulary, no new terms.
• Psalm 145: chesed/emet/rachum v’chanun convergence — addressed above; this psalm functions as the curriculum’s single densest concentration of Covenant Faithfulness vocabulary and should be flagged in Phase 2 as a priority theologian-review document in its own right.

All 150 psalms are accounted for above, either through direct doctrinal/lexical analysis or explicit “reviewed — no new vocabulary risk” notation.

---

This analysis must be loaded alongside 08_core_glossary.md, translation_memory.json, and bible_term_registry.json before Phase 2 Psalms segment translation begins. Ranked ambiguities in Part 4 should govern review-routing priority within the Critical/High tiers already assigned in doctrine_risk_registry.json.