Linguistic Gap Analysis
Linguistic Gap Analysis — 2 Chronicles (English → english)
Purpose and Scope
This document executes PRD Phase 1 Step 8 for the 2 Chronicles curriculum. As with the baseline Romans Language Package, English is both source and destination language: the “gap” being analyzed is not a foreign-language lexical gap but the gap between Paul’s — here, the Chronicler’s — meaning and the meaning contemporary English readers will confidently (or uncertainly) supply. This analysis draws on 07_semantic_analysis.md, 08_core_glossary.md, and assets/bible_term_registry.json already produced for this curriculum, and extends the baseline translation_memory.json / doctrine_risk_registry.json conventions without contradicting them. Every reused baseline term keeps its baseline rendering exactly, per the hard rule.
Coverage spans the full book, 2 Chronicles 1–36, with the core passage (7:11-22) as theological anchor rather than scope boundary. Chapters contributing no new terms or doctrine-relevant vocabulary beyond what is already logged are noted as reviewed at the end of this document (see “Full-Book Coverage Note”).
Part 1: Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix
For each of the six assigned doctrines: the available English vocabulary, its specific weaknesses in contemporary usage, and the recommended handling strategy for Phase 2 content generation.
1. Temple Worship and God’s Presence
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available terms | Temple, holy, Most Holy Place, glory (kavod), cherubim, dwell/dwelling place, consecrate |
| Weaknesses | ”Temple” is a generic comparative-religion label (Greek temple, Hindu temple) that erases exclusivity — THIS is the one house YHWH himself chose (7:12,16). “Glory” survives mainly as nostalgic (“glory days”) or self-seeking (“glory hound”) idiom, nearly inverted from a radiant divine presence filling a physical space. “Cherubim” has been thoroughly domesticated by greeting-card and Valentine’s-Day imagery into cute infant angels — nearly opposite the awesome guardian-creature sense guarding the Most Holy Place. “Holy” survives mainly as sarcastic idiom (“holier-than-thou”) or content-free exclamation (“holy cow!”). The graded-holiness architecture (courts → Holy Place → Most Holy Place) has no ready contemporary analogue; readers accustomed to informal, unstructured access to God (a genuine and largely positive New Testament development) may not intuitively grasp why proximity to God’s presence was once so carefully graded and restricted. |
| Recommended strategy | (1) Never let “Temple” stand alone on first substantive use per document — anchor it explicitly as “the Temple, the one place God himself chose for his name to dwell” (7:12,16), distinguishing it from any generic comparative-religion sense. (2) State plainly, each time the glory-cloud event (5:13-14; 7:1-3) is narrated, that the text presents this as a real, witnessed, historical event, not a literary metaphor for solemnity or vague “spiritual atmosphere” — apply the baseline’s resurrection-as-historical-fact handling here by direct analogy. (3) Gloss “cherubim” explicitly as fearsome guardian creatures, not cartoon infants, on first use. (4) Use the graded-holiness architecture pedagogically (not defensively) — explain it as reinforcing how seriously God’s holiness and human sinfulness were once separated, which sets up why the New Testament’s open access through Christ is such good news, without collapsing 2 Chronicles’ own point into a premature New Testament resolution. |
2. Conditional Blessing and National Repentance (2 Chronicles 7:14)
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available terms | humble themselves, pray, seek my face, turn (repent), forgive, heal their land, sin |
| Weaknesses | This is the single densest concentration of false-friend and cultural-erosion risk in the whole book, because 7:14 is built almost entirely from words contemporary English has individualized, medicalized, or made ambivalent: “humble themselves” collides with self-esteem culture’s suspicion of humility and the “humble brag” idiom; “seek my face” collides with open-ended “spiritual seeker” language lacking a specific object; “turn”/repent sounds either archaic-revivalist or gets reframed as generic therapeutic “personal growth”; “heal their land” collides overwhelmingly with individual medical/psychological healing language, losing the corporate-territorial-agricultural sense entirely; “sin” is trivialized by marketing (“sinfully delicious”) and resisted by guilt-averse non-judgmental cultural norms. |
| Recommended strategy | Treat 7:14 as a single unit requiring a sustained explanatory frame rather than four separately glossed words: state explicitly that this is a corporate, national, four-step covenant response (not an individual’s private devotional checklist), and that “heal their land” means territorial/agricultural restoration of an entire nation’s crops and security, not a person’s medical or emotional recovery. Because 7:14 is flagged in the consistency rules below as a verse requiring identical wording across all documents, lock its full clarified rendering once and reuse verbatim (see Part 4). |
3. Faithful and Unfaithful Kings
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available terms | walk before me, commands and decrees, fear of the LORD, seek the LORD, pride, abandoned the LORD, other gods, Baal, kingdom |
| Weaknesses | The Chronicler’s evaluative vocabulary is largely dead metaphor to unchurched readers (“walked before me/in the ways of David” — opaque without a gloss). “Fear of the LORD” collides with contemporary “fear” as dread/anxiety, and with leadership culture’s general disapproval of “ruling by fear.” “Pride” is the single most inverted term in the whole glossary: contemporary usage is overwhelmingly positive (self-esteem culture, identity-affirmation “Pride”), nearly the opposite of the destructive self-exaltation the Chronicler condemns (ch. 26). “Kingdom” risks conflation with the New Testament’s spiritual “kingdom of God,” collapsing a specific political-historical dynasty into an unrelated doctrinal category. “Other gods”/“Baal” collide with religious-pluralism resistance to exclusivity claims. |
| Recommended strategy | Gloss “walk before me”/“walked in the ways of David” on first occurrence as a whole-life pattern of conduct, not a literal walk. Flag “pride” for mandatory explicit contrast with its dominant positive contemporary sense every substantive occurrence — this term needs the same escalation-rule treatment the baseline gives “election” and “justification.” Keep “kingdom” (Judah/Israel) and “kingdom of God” (baseline doctrine) typographically and contextually distinct; never let one silently stand in for the other. Identify Baal by name as a specific, historically real Canaanite deity, not an abstraction, to keep the exclusivity claim concrete rather than allowing it to soften into vague “staying spiritually devoted” language. |
4. Reform under Hezekiah and Josiah
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available terms | cleanse, sin offering, Passover, Book of the Law, consecrate |
| Weaknesses | ”Cleanse” collides with hygiene/consumer-wellness usage (“detox cleanse”), losing the ritual-relational-covenantal sense. “Sin offering” collides with secular “sacrifice” as generic self-denial (“she sacrificed her weekend”), losing the substitutionary, blood-atonement sense entirely — this parallels the baseline’s mandatory escalation rule for atonement/propitiation language and should receive equivalent theologian-review weight. “Passover” is a genuine partial asset (living, present-day Jewish observance keeps the term populated with real content) but carries supersessionism-adjacent risk if presented as a superseded “Old Testament practice” rather than a still-observed festival whose meaning this curriculum interprets through a Christian covenant-renewal lens without claiming exclusive ownership of it. “Book of the Law” collides with contemporary academic/secular treatment of ancient religious texts as purely human artifacts, echoing the baseline’s “inspiration of Scripture” tension directly. |
| Recommended strategy | Explicitly distinguish “cleanse” from hygiene/wellness usage on first use per document. Treat “sin offering” with the same mandatory-clarification weight the system prompt assigns to atonement/propitiation language — flag every substantive occurrence for human theologian review. Present Passover respectfully as both a historical Old Testament covenant-renewal celebration and a living festival still observed today, avoiding language that implies it ended or was replaced. State the “Book of the Law” discovery (ch. 34) as the curriculum’s own claim about divine textual authority triggering genuine reform, directly engaging (not avoiding) the competing secular-academic frame. |
5. The Exile as Covenant Consequence
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available terms | uproot, abandoned the LORD, exile/captivity, byword, land’s sabbath rest |
| Weaknesses | ”Exile” has loosened in contemporary secular usage into voluntary or metaphorical senses (a “self-imposed exile,” a “tax exile”), obscuring the forced, judicial character of the Babylonian deportation. “Abandoned the LORD” as an explicit theological cause for national disaster runs against a contemporary secular-explanatory culture that defaults to purely political/military/economic causation, and against justified wariness of glib “this disaster is divine punishment” claims in modern public discourse. “Uproot” and “byword” are agricultural/archaic metaphors requiring active glossing rather than active correction (obsolescence rather than false-friend risk). “Land’s sabbath rest” (36:21) has essentially no contemporary cultural reference point at all. |
| Recommended strategy | State plainly, each time “exile” is used, that this was involuntary, judicial, and historical — not a lifestyle choice, political metaphor, or literary device. Present “abandoned the LORD” as the Chronicler’s own consistent interpretive claim about this specific covenant community’s history, while adding a pastoral caveat (consistent with baseline handling) that this is not a license for readers to make equivalent claims about the causes of contemporary national disasters. Actively supply the land-sabbath-law background (Leviticus 25-26) rather than assuming any reader familiarity, and explicitly connect ch. 36’s fulfillment back to 7:20’s “uproot” warning so the prophecy-fulfillment structure is visible rather than assumed. |
6. Hope of Restoration
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available terms | remnant, decree of Cyrus, the LORD stirred the spirit, seek the LORD, established the throne (backward-referencing) |
| Weaknesses | ”Remnant” is rare and church-flavored in ordinary contemporary speech and risks being flattened into “a small leftover group” without its covenant-hope weight. “The LORD stirred the spirit [of Cyrus]” (36:22) is at serious risk of doctrinal conflation with the baseline’s Trinitarian “Holy Spirit” entry — this is God’s providential influence on a pagan king’s own will, not personal indwelling, and conflating the two categories would import New Testament pneumatology into a very different Old Testament providence category. “Decree of Cyrus” needs to be affirmed as historical fact (corroborated by extra-biblical evidence), consistent with the baseline’s plain-historical-fact handling of the resurrection, rather than treated as legend or symbol. |
| Recommended strategy | Gloss “remnant” explicitly as “those who survived judgment and remain includable in covenant renewal” rather than a merely quantitative “leftover” note. State explicitly, wherever 36:22 is discussed, that “the LORD stirred the spirit of Cyrus” describes God’s sovereign providence over a non-believing ruler’s own motivation and will — not the Holy Spirit’s personal indwelling — flagging this for mandatory theologian-level distinction per the doctrinal-conflation risk already logged in the term registry. Present the Cyrus decree as verifiable ancient historical policy fulfilling a specific prior prophetic word (Jeremiah), reinforcing 7:14’s promise/fulfillment arc as this book’s ultimate narrative resolution. |
Part 2: Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods
2A. Missing Vocabulary (concepts contemporary English has no ready native word for)
These are gaps of absence — English simply lacks an everyday word carrying the concept, requiring either a retained technical/transliterated term with a built-in gloss, or a multi-word explanatory phrase every time.
| Concept | Gap description | Handling |
|---|---|---|
| Graded holiness / restricted proximity to sacred space | No everyday English concept of “zones” of access to the sacred; contemporary religious life (and most Protestant worship spaces) does not physically encode holiness gradients the way the Temple’s courts did. | Multi-word explanatory phrase each time (see Doctrine 1 strategy); do not assume any residual cultural intuition. |
| Corporate/national repentance (as opposed to individual repentance) | English “repent,” where it survives at all, is almost always individual and revivalist-personal (“I repented of my sin”); there is no common English idiom for a whole nation collectively humbling itself. | Explicit “corporate/national” qualifier attached every time 7:14’s four verbs are discussed; do not let the individual sense silently substitute for the corporate one. |
| Land/territory as a covenant participant that can be “healed” or given “rest” | Contemporary English has no default frame in which a nation’s land itself is a party affected by, and restored through, covenant fidelity (as opposed to being a passive backdrop to human action). | Retain the phrase “heal their land” / “the land’s rest” as a fixed technical unit with a standing gloss, rather than translating loosely into “the country will do better” or similar generic paraphrase that loses the territorial-covenant theology. |
| Sabbatical land-rest law (Leviticus 25-26 background) | No contemporary agricultural or legal practice corresponds to a divinely mandated land-fallow cycle enforced, in this narrative, through exile itself. | Must be supplied as background information, not assumed; treat as a one-time explanatory footnote reusable across all documents referencing 36:21. |
| The Davidic covenant’s conditional dynastic promise as reaffirmed in 7:17-18 | English readers may know “covenant” and may know “David,” but the specific idea of a promise that is both permanently secured in one sense (2 Samuel 7) and conditioned in another (obedience required for the individual king’s own throne to be established, 2 Chronicles 7:18) has no everyday parallel and is easily flattened into either “unconditional promise” or “conditional contract” alone. | Requires explicit theological unpacking each time 7:18 is engaged; do not let either half of the tension silently drop out. |
2B. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (concepts with too many competing contemporary senses, requiring active fencing)
These are the inverse problem: English already has a well-worn everyday word, but that word’s dominant contemporary sense actively crowds out or contradicts the biblical sense. “Fencing” here means explicitly marking the boundary between the biblical sense and the competing sense so readers do not silently import the wrong one.
| Term | Competing contemporary senses crowding the field | Fencing strategy |
|---|---|---|
| pride | (a) self-esteem-culture affirmation (“take pride in yourself”); (b) identity-affirmation “Pride” (capitalized, cultural/political movement) | Fence explicitly: this is the destructive self-exaltation against God’s ordained order (ch. 26), the opposite of the dominant positive contemporary sense — flag as mandatory clarification, comparable to baseline’s righteousness/self-righteous treatment. |
| fasting | Diet/wellness culture’s “intermittent fasting” (self-optimization, health) | Fence explicitly: corporate, God-directed dependence and repentance (ch. 20), not a health regimen; state the contrast directly every substantive occurrence. |
| healing / heal their land | Individual medical/psychological “healing journey,” “healing from trauma” | Fence explicitly: territorial, agricultural, national restoration of an entire land, not an individual’s body or emotions. |
| cleanse | Hygiene/consumer “detox cleanse,” cleaning products | Fence explicitly: ritual-moral purification of sacred space/persons as precondition for restored worship, not a wellness routine. |
| chosen | Affirmation-culture “you are chosen” (therapeutic self-esteem idiom); modern geopolitical “chosen people” rhetoric | Fence explicitly: God’s specific, purposive, sovereign designation of a place/dynasty/people for his own reasons, neither generic self-esteem affirmation nor a live political claim about the modern state. |
| kingdom | Fantasy-fiction “kingdom” (baseline caution); New Testament “kingdom of God” (spiritual reign) | Fence explicitly on both sides: this is the actual historical political dominion of Judah/Israel — neither a fictional realm nor a direct synonym for the New Testament’s kingdom-of-God doctrine. |
| exile | Loosened metaphorical/voluntary usage (“self-imposed exile,” “tax exile”) | Fence explicitly: forced, judicial, historical deportation as covenant judgment, never a lifestyle choice or metaphor. |
| fear of the LORD | Dread/anxiety-dominant “fear”; leadership culture’s disapproval of “ruling by fear” | Fence explicitly: reverent awe and submission, structurally parallel to the baseline’s treatment of “obedience” as freely given rather than servile. |
| cherubim | Greeting-card/Valentine’s cute infant-angel imagery | Fence explicitly: fearsome composite guardian creatures reinforcing the Temple’s holiness architecture. |
| the LORD (YHWH) vs. Lord vs. lord | Baseline’s existing Critical risk (archaic aristocratic title / fantasy-fiction usage), now compounded by an invisible-in-speech typographic distinction between God’s personal name (YHWH, “the LORD”) and the generic title/noun | Fence explicitly and repeatedly: state on first use in every document that small-capitals “the LORD” renders God’s own personal covenant name, distinct from “Lord” as a title and from “lord” as an ordinary noun — this distinction cannot be assumed retained from a single mention. |
| glory | Nostalgic “glory days”; self-seeking “glory hound” | Fence explicitly, extending the baseline’s Medium-risk note to this book’s elevated High-risk context: God’s radiant, witnessed, historical manifested presence, not nostalgia or self-promotion. |
| seek (the LORD / my face) | Open-ended, self-directed “spiritual seeker” language | Fence explicitly: active, specific, covenantal dependence on and consultation of the one true God, not an open-ended search without a defined object. |
| covenant | Real-estate/contract-law “restrictive covenant” | Already fenced at baseline tier (High); this curriculum extends the fence to cover the Davidic dynastic promise specifically (7:18) as a live, ongoing instance, not only the ark/covenant-renewal-ceremony instances. |
Part 3: Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions
Since destination = source language (English), “transliteration” here functions differently than in a genuine cross-language Language Package: it means retaining the Hebrew-derived or traditional English-Bible-tradition term itself (transliterated or calqued) rather than replacing it with a fully modernized paraphrase. The decision in each case balances traditional-register fidelity and cross-document consistency against contemporary comprehensibility.
| Term/phrase | Decision | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| the LORD (YHWH) | Retain the traditional small-capitals English-Bible convention “the LORD”; do not substitute “Yahweh” or “Jehovah” as the primary rendering. | Matches the established English Bible translation tradition the baseline anchors to (and NLT, the site’s published-citation standard); transliterating outright (“Yahweh”) would break consistency with virtually all mainstream English Bible translations readers already use, even though it would solve the invisible-in-speech small-caps problem. Retain the convention but add mandatory explanatory text (see Part 2B) rather than changing the rendering itself. |
| Baal | Retain as a transliterated proper name; do not paraphrase as “a false god” generically. | Concreteness is doctrinally important — this is a specific, historically real rival deity, not an abstraction; a generic paraphrase would weaken the exclusivity claim’s historical grounding. |
| cherubim | Retain the transliterated term; do not paraphrase as “angels” or “guardian statues." | "Angels” is too generic and imports unrelated New Testament angelology; “guardian statues” loses the living, composite-creature imagery. Retain with mandatory corrective gloss instead (see Part 2B). |
| seed of David (baseline) / Davidic covenant language in 7:17-18 | Retain “David your father”/Davidic covenant framing rather than paraphrasing into modern dynastic language (“David’s royal line”), but supply the modern gloss alongside it. | Consistent with the baseline’s own handling of “seed of David” — older phrase retained alongside a modern gloss rather than replaced outright, preserving continuity with established English hymnody and translation tradition. |
| Passover | Retain as the standard English Bible-tradition proper name; do not paraphrase as “the Exodus-remembrance festival” as the primary rendering. | ”Passover” is already the universally recognized English term across both Christian and Jewish usage; paraphrasing would actually reduce, not increase, comprehension, and would risk the supersessionist framing this curriculum must avoid. |
| fear of the LORD | Retain the traditional phrase; do not paraphrase to “respect for God” or “reverence for God” as the primary rendering. | ”Fear of the LORD” is an established theological idiom across the English Bible tradition (Proverbs, Psalms) that this curriculum’s readers will re-encounter elsewhere; replacing it with a softer paraphrase would create inconsistency with the wider English Bible corpus and lose the idiom’s traditional weight. Retain with mandatory corrective gloss. |
| remnant | Retain the traditional term; do not paraphrase as “survivors” or “those who were left” as the primary rendering. | ”Remnant” carries specific covenant-hope theological freight accumulated across the whole English Bible tradition (Isaiah, Romans 11) that “survivors” does not; retain with a brief gloss rather than substituting a flatter synonym. |
| heal their land | Paraphrase-forward: retain the phrase but always accompanied by an explanatory gloss (“restore the whole nation’s crops, security, and well-being”), rather than a bare transliteration-style retention alone. | Unlike Baal or cherubim, this phrase’s risk is not unfamiliarity but active mis-individualization (see Part 2B); a bare retention without the gloss would reliably mislead, so the gloss is treated as functionally mandatory, not optional. |
| byword (7:20) | Modernize/paraphrase as primary rendering: “an object of mockery and ridicule,” matching the term_registry’s chosen English_term, with “byword” retained parenthetically for readers of other English Bible translations. | ”Byword” is genuinely near-extinct in ordinary speech (Low-Medium risk, obsolescence rather than false-friend); a plain-language paraphrase serves comprehension better here than retention, unlike the higher-stakes terms above where traditional retention carries doctrinal weight. |
| the LORD stirred the spirit (36:22) | Retain the traditional phrase but mandatorily accompanied by an explicit disambiguating clause distinguishing it from “the Holy Spirit.” | Retention preserves continuity with the wider English Bible tradition’s phrasing of this verse; the disambiguating clause is non-negotiable given the serious doctrinal-conflation risk already logged (High risk) in the term registry. |
General principle governing this table: retain traditional English-Bible-tradition wording wherever (a) the phrase already carries accumulated theological weight across the wider English Bible corpus, or (b) concreteness/historicity is doctrinally load-bearing (proper names, specific deities, specific historical events); paraphrase forward only where the sole risk is obsolescence with no offsetting theological cost (byword) or where a bare retention would reliably produce active mis-individualization requiring a built-in corrective gloss regardless (heal their land).
Part 4: Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities
Ranked by combined severity of (i) how confidently a wrong sense will be supplied, (ii) doctrinal centrality to this curriculum’s six assigned doctrines, and (iii) breadth of occurrence across the book. Follows the baseline’s Critical > High > Medium > Low tiering and its “false-friend drift is worse than obsolescence” principle.
- “the LORD” (YHWH) vs. “Lord”/“lord” — Critical. Compounds the baseline’s existing Critical risk on “Lord” with an entirely new, invisible-in-speech typographic problem specific to this Old Testament book, where YHWH is God’s own covenant name and occurs on nearly every page. Highest-frequency, highest-stakes ambiguity in the entire curriculum.
- pride (ch. 26; 25:19; 32:25) — Critical. The single most inverted term identified: dominant contemporary usage is positive (self-esteem culture, “Pride” identity-affirmation usage) where the Chronicler’s usage is a severe warning against destructive self-exaltation. Directly load-bearing for the Faithful and Unfaithful Kings doctrine (Uzziah’s downfall is the paradigm case).
- other gods / Baal / exclusivity claims — Critical. Collides head-on with contemporary religious pluralism’s broad resistance to exclusive-worship claims; risk of the curriculum silently softening 2 Chronicles’ own repeated, explicit exclusivity language (7:19,22 and throughout).
- heal their land — High-to-Critical in practice, because the individualized/medicalized contemporary default is so strong and so automatic that readers are unlikely to even notice a corporate-territorial sense is possible without explicit correction. Directly load-bearing for Conditional Blessing and National Repentance, the doctrine anchored to the core passage itself.
- fasting — High. Diet/wellness culture’s “intermittent fasting” is now so dominant a sense that readers may actively resist recognizing a non-health-related meaning at all without correction; parallels the baseline’s “grace period” false-friend severity.
- chosen — High. Sits at the intersection of therapeutic affirmation-culture drift and live contemporary political sensitivity around “chosen people” language; directly touches both Temple Worship/God’s Presence and Conditional Blessing doctrines via 7:12,16.
- the LORD stirred the spirit of Cyrus — High. Serious specific doctrinal-conflation risk with the baseline’s Trinitarian Holy Spirit entry; low frequency (one verse) but high doctrinal stakes for Hope of Restoration if mishandled.
- fear of the LORD — High. Contemporary “fear” is dread-dominant; risk of either mis-reading as literal terror or over-correcting into a flattened “just means respect” gloss that loses the reverent-awe weight.
- kingdom (mamlakah) vs. kingdom of God — High. Conflation risk runs in both directions across nearly the entire second half of the book (chs. 10-36); mishandling would blur a purely political-historical narrative with an unrelated New Testament doctrine.
- humble themselves / turn (shuv) / abandoned the LORD (7:14, 7:19, 7:22 and recurring) — High, treated together because they form the single interpretive backbone of Conditional Blessing and National Repentance and of The Exile as Covenant Consequence; cultural resistance to guilt-based, humility-based, and theologically-causal language operates on all three simultaneously.
- sin offering / cleanse (ch. 29) — High. Parallels the baseline’s mandatory atonement/propitiation escalation rule; secular “sacrifice” and “cleanse” drift both apply, load-bearing for Reform under Hezekiah and Josiah.
- cherubim / glory (chs. 3, 5, 7) — High. Domestication (cherubim) and nostalgic/self-seeking drift (glory) both risk draining the Temple dedication narrative of its intended visible, historical, awe-inducing force — load-bearing for Temple Worship and God’s Presence.
- exile / uproot — Medium-High. Metaphorical loosening of “exile” in secular usage is real but less severe than the top-tier items, since context (Babylon, deportation, ch. 36’s narrative detail) does substantial disambiguating work on its own.
- remnant / Book of the Law / decree of Cyrus — Medium. Genuine obsolescence and secular-academic-framing risks, but these prompt readers to ask rather than confidently misread, consistent with the baseline’s obsolescence-is-lower-risk-than-false-friend principle; still require human/native-speaker review per doctrine risk tier.
Full-Book Coverage Note
Every chapter of 2 Chronicles (1-36) was reviewed for load-bearing vocabulary as part of this analysis, consistent with the FULL-BOOK COVERAGE mandate. Chapters not individually itemized in the doctrine vocabulary matrix or ranked-ambiguity list above (notably: 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10-11, 13, 18, 21, 24, 27, 31, 32-33 apart from the pride/wrath items already logged) were reviewed and found to introduce no new load-bearing terminology beyond what is already captured in 08_core_glossary.md and assets/bible_term_registry.json — their content (temple construction details, additional royal-reign summaries, war narratives, further instances of the Chronicler’s repeating “sought/abandoned the LORD” evaluative pattern) is fully covered by the terms and doctrines already logged (kingdom, seek the LORD, abandoned the LORD, faith/trust, wrath, high place, wisdom) rather than requiring separate new entries. This is noted explicitly per the hard rule rather than silently omitted.
This document extends but does not contradict the baseline translation_memory.json, bible_term_registry.json, and doctrine_risk_registry.json. All reused baseline term renderings above are locked exactly as recorded in the baseline package.