Linguistic Gap Analysis

English → French | 1 Corinthians 1–16 | Core Passage: 1 Corinthians 15:1-11

This analysis extends the baseline Romans Language Package’s methodology to 1 Corinthians. It builds directly on 08_core_glossary.md and bible_term_registry.json (already produced for this curriculum) and does not repeat their entries wholesale; instead it diagnoses why French vocabulary succeeds or strains for each doctrine, maps the crowded semantic neighborhoods that require active fencing in Phase 2, records transliteration-vs-paraphrase decisions, and ranks the letter’s highest-risk ambiguities for reviewer prioritization.

All renderings below are consistent with and subordinate to translation_memory.json (baseline) and the new entries proposed in 08_core_glossary.md / bible_term_registry.json. Nothing here authorizes a rendering that contradicts those files; where a conflict is identified, the existing file governs and this document flags it for resolution rather than silently overriding it.

---

Part 1 — Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

For each of the ten curriculum doctrines: the available French term(s), the specific weakness(es) of French vocabulary for conveying the doctrine, and the recommended translation strategy.

1. The Resurrection of Christ and Believers (ch. 15, esp. 15:1-11)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
résurrection (noun); est ressuscité / a été ressuscité (verb); est apparu; la résurrection des morts	(a) French active-voice “il est ressuscité” reads reflexively (he rose himself) and loses the Greek perfect passive ἐγήγερται’s implicit divine agency (the Father raised him). (b) Secular-naturalist French readership readily metaphorizes “résurrection” as renewal, legacy, or “his ideas live on” — no competing reincarnation folk-concept exists (unlike Hindi), but flattening-to-metaphor is a live risk. (c) “il est apparu” can be misread as a subjective vision/apparition (“une apparition”) rather than an objective, eyewitness-checkable historical event — French “apparition” has strong folk-Catholic Marian-apparition resonance that could bleed into “apparu.”	Retain baseline noun “résurrection” and verb “est ressuscité” unchanged (Critical, per registry). In teaching material accompanying 15:1-11, explicitly gloss the passive sense (“ressuscité par le Père”) at least once per lesson unit to recover the lost agency. For ὤφθη/“il est apparu,” avoid any syntactic proximity to “une apparition” (noun) in surrounding sentences; prefer verb constructions (“le Christ s’est montré vivant à…”, “il s’est fait voir de…”) in expository (non-quotation) material to reinforce historicity, while keeping the direct Scripture quotation itself at “il est apparu” for citation fidelity.

2. Christian Unity versus Factionalism (chs. 1, 3-4, 11-12)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
divisions; charnel; le corps (unity metaphor); un seul corps	French has a ready cognate trap: “schisme” is available and etymologically tempting for σχίσμα but denotes a formal, permanent institutional rupture in French usage (Grand Schisme, schisme orthodoxe-catholique) — far stronger and more final than Paul’s party-spirit factionalism within one living congregation.	Reject “schisme” categorically (already fixed in bible_term_registry.json); use “divisions” throughout, and in teaching material clarify the referent is intra-congregational rivalry, not denominational rupture — an important clarification precisely because French readers live inside a culture with vivid historical schism memory (1054, 1517, French Wars of Religion) that could otherwise inflate the stakes of Corinth’s dispute.

3. The Cross as Wisdom and Power (chs. 1-2)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
croix; sagesse; folie; scandale; puissance de Dieu (baseline)	(a) “Croix” is thoroughly secularized/decorativized in contemporary France (jewelry, fashion, historical monument) — the word no longer automatically carries scandal or power connotations for a secular reader. (b) “Sagesse” carries no built-in irony; Paul’s rhetorical inversion (worldly wisdom is folly; the cross’s folly is wisdom) depends entirely on context Paul supplies, which French vocabulary cannot supply on its own. (c) “Scandale” has drifted overwhelmingly toward media/political/moral scandal (scandale financier, scandale sexuel) — the theological “stumbling block to faith” sense is now a minority, secondary sense for most readers.	Use baseline/glossary terms as fixed (“croix,” “sagesse,” “folie,” “scandale” — already correctly flagged Medium/High in 08_core_glossary.md). Compensate at the teaching-material layer, not the translation layer: require an explicit framing sentence near 1:18-25 material that names the ancient shame of crucifixion (a criminal’s public execution, not decoration) before the passage is expounded, and require “scandale” to always appear adjacent to a phrase anchoring it to unbelief/offense-to-faith (“un scandale pour la foi/l’incrédulité”) rather than standing alone.

4. Church Discipline and Holiness (chs. 5-6)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
immoralité sexuelle; le livrer à Satan; le temple du Saint-Esprit; acheté(s)	(a) France has no living congregational-discipline practice comparable to Paul’s simple act in most contemporary church cultures (Catholic canon law’s excommunication is a developed, remote juridical procedure most readers have never witnessed; most French Protestant/evangelical churches do not practice formal discipline visibly). This is a genuine experiential gap, not primarily a lexical one — the words exist but the practice they name is culturally unfamiliar. (b) “La Pâque” vs “Pâques” is a French-specific orthographic trap (see Part 3 below).	Render literally (“le livrer à Satan”) without softening into a vaguer “l’exclure de l’Église,” which would lose the passage’s severity and its stated restorative purpose (“afin que son esprit soit sauvé”). Because the practice-gap is experiential rather than lexical, address it through teaching-material background notes describing first-century congregational discipline as a simple, restorative act of the gathered assembly — not the Catholic canon-law apparatus French readers may otherwise default to imagining.

5. Marriage and Singleness (ch. 7)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
se marier / le mariage; vierge; non marié(e) / célibataire; se séparer / divorcer; don (état de vie)	(a) Contemporary French civil-law divorce (procedure, no-fault divorce since 1975, PACS, cohabitation norms) is a substantially different legal and social landscape from Paul’s first-century pastoral instruction; readers may unconsciously read Paul’s counsel through modern secular family-law categories. (b) “Vierge” (7:25-38) must carry at least two distinct referents (a generally unmarried woman; a specific betrothed daughter/fiancée), and French offers no single word that disambiguates — the ambiguity is inherited from the source text, not created by French.	Do not attempt a lexical fix for the referent ambiguity in 7:25-38; flag for native speaker/theologian review per verse and let context and teaching commentary carry the disambiguation, consistent with the glossary’s existing flag. For the divorce/separation vocabulary, ensure teaching material distinguishes first-century pastoral counsel from any implied comment on modern French civil procedure, PACS, or secular family courts.

6. Christian Liberty and Idol Meat (chs. 8-10)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
viande sacrifiée aux idoles; connaissance; conscience; droit / liberté / autorité; idolâtrie; démon	(a) The entire cultural institution behind εἰδωλόθυτον — meat sold in markets adjoining pagan temples, dinner invitations in temple dining rooms — has zero living analog in contemporary France; this is a pure background-knowledge gap, not a translation problem. (b) “Gnose” is available as a cognate for γνῶσις but is explicitly disqualified: it now denotes the specific ancient Gnostic heresy and esoteric-elitist theological systems, an anachronistic and misleading heresy-collision Paul is not making. (c) ἐξουσία spans at least two senses (personal liberty one may forgo; disputed authority-symbol at 11:10) that French cannot merge into one word without ambiguity.	Use “viande/aliments sacrifiés aux idoles” and require a mandatory background note (Greco-Roman temple-market and temple-dining practice) attached to every ch. 8/10 lesson — this is a literacy gap requiring curriculum scaffolding, not a lexical substitution. Maintain the “gnose” prohibition. Treat ἐξουσία exactly as the baseline treats “called”: flag every occurrence for a sense-check (liberty/right vs. authority) before finalizing “droit,” “liberté,” or “autorité.”

7. The Lord’s Supper (ch. 11)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
le repas du Seigneur / la Cène; corps et sang; en mémoire de moi; coupe; discerner le corps; tradition(s)	This is the single most theologically overloaded neighborhood in the entire curriculum for French. Every available word choice (“Cène” vs. “Eucharistie”; “coupe” vs. “calice”; plain “en mémoire de moi” vs. an anamnesis-loaded elaboration) is already claimed by one or another French Christian tradition’s sacramental theology (Catholic transubstantiation, Lutheran real presence, Reformed real spiritual presence, evangelical/Zwinglian memorialism). French, unlike some destination languages, has too much precise vocabulary here, each option pre-loaded with a specific eucharistic theology, rather than too little.	Hold the line already set in bible_term_registry.json: “la Cène” (not “l’Eucharistie”) as primary term; “coupe” (not “calice”); “corps et sang” and “en mémoire de moi” rendered with maximum theological neutrality and no interpretive insertion. Every occurrence remains Critical/High and requires mandatory theologian review per the baseline’s escalation rules for atonement/sacramental language. This is a fencing problem, not a vocabulary-supply problem — see Part 2.

8. Spiritual Gifts and the Body of Christ (ch. 12; also ch. 14)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
dons spirituels; le corps du Christ; membre(s); baptisés; diverses langues / don des langues; dons de guérison	(a) “Le corps du Christ” is lexically identical to the ch. 11 Eucharistic phrase, requiring the reader to track referent-switching (sacrament vs. ecclesial body) across chapters using context alone — French does not supply a distinguishing word. (b) “Membre” carries a strong contemporary secular sense of voluntary-association membership (membre d’un club, d’un parti), which risks flattening Paul’s organic, non-optional body-part imagery into administrative list-membership. (c) Tongues/healing vocabulary sits inside a genuinely contested, currently active French religious landscape (Renouveau charismatique catholique alongside cessationist-leaning Reformed and continuationist evangelical/Pentecostal streams), meaning the doctrine, not the word, is disputed.	Reuse “le corps du Christ” for the ecclesial sense but require an explicit disambiguating note wherever chs. 11 and 12 are taught in proximity. For “membre,” pair the noun with organic-imagery reinforcement in surrounding prose (e.g., “chaque membre, comme une partie du corps vivant”) rather than attempting a different noun. For tongues/healing, keep the translation stable and place the doctrinal controversy entirely in teaching commentary, flagged for native-speaker and, where the curriculum takes an interpretive position on continuation/cessation, theologian review.

9. Love as the Greater Way (ch. 13)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
amour; charité (rejected primary); patient(e) / plein(e) de bonté; envieux / gonflé d’orgueil; parfait / ce qui est achevé	This is French’s most historically loaded either/or choice in the whole letter. “Charité,” the historic Vulgate/Crampon rendering, has narrowed in contemporary French almost entirely to organized almsgiving (une association caritative, faire la charité) — using it as the primary rendering of ἀγάπη would reduce Paul’s comprehensive relational-ethical term to a single category of financial generosity. “Amour” is broader but carries its own secular saturation (romantic/erotic love, “l’amour” in popular culture) requiring active definitional work to isolate the agapē sense from eros/philia connotations.	Confirm “amour” as primary rendering (already Critical-flagged, matching the glossary’s documented decision). This decision must be explicitly surfaced to theologian reviewers as a deliberate choice, not an oversight, because reviewers formed in Catholic devotional tradition may expect or request “charité” from memory of older liturgical/Bible language. Teaching material for ch. 13 should include an explicit contrastive note (amour vs. charité vs. eros/philia) to do the definitional isolation work French vocabulary cannot do unaided.

10. Order in Worship (chs. 11, 14)

Available French terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
ordre; tête / chef; langue(s); se taire / garder le silence; interprétation	(a) κεφαλή’s two French candidates (“tête” vs. “chef”) sit on opposite sides of a live complementarian/egalitarian fault line running through French Catholicism and Protestantism alike; neither word is neutral. (b) σιγάω applied to women (14:34-35) intersects the same debate plus a text-critical question about the verses’ manuscript placement — French has no lexical solution because the dispute is theological/textual, not translational.	Escalate κεφαλή to explicit theologian ruling before Phase 2 (already flagged Critical in the registry; do not resolve silently by default preference). Render σιγάω literally and identically to its other ch. 14 occurrences (14:28, 30, 34); do not paraphrase 14:34-35 more strongly or more softly than the surrounding disorderly-tongues/prophets instructions, so the base translation does not pre-judge the interpretive debate.

---

Part 2 — Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

2A. Missing Vocabulary (concepts French has no ready single word for)

Concept	Gap description	Approach
ἔκτρωμα (15:8, “untimely born”)	French “avorton” is the literal cognate-equivalent but carries a harsh, almost insulting register in ordinary usage (used as a term of abuse), stronger than Paul’s self-deprecating but not self-degrading tone. No softer single word carries the same “abnormal, abrupt birth” image.	Paraphrase rather than single-word rendering: “comme à celui qui est né après terme, de manière anormale” or equivalent periphrasis, preserving the “undeserved, abrupt” force without importing the insult register. Flag for native-speaker register review, as already noted in the registry.
ἀδόκιμος (9:27, athletic-disqualification sense)	“Réprouvé” exists as a historical option but is lexically annexed by Reformed/Jansenist double-predestination discourse (the eternally “reprobate”) — using it would import a determinism controversy foreign to Paul’s athletic metaphor about disciplined ministry, not final salvation status.	Use “disqualifié,” an athletic/competitive-register word with no soteriological baggage, exactly as already fixed in the registry. Do not substitute “réprouvé” under any circumstance; treat this as equivalent in severity to the baseline’s “élection”/political-election caution.
ἀνάμνησις in a theologically neutral register (11:24-25)	French sacramental vocabulary tends to pull toward one of two poles: a thin “souvenir” (mere sentimental recollection, too weak) or a thick liturgical “mémorial” (which in Catholic usage can imply an active re-presentation of the sacrifice, too strong/specific). Neither pole is neutral.	Retain the deliberately plain, low-register “en mémoire de moi” (already fixed) precisely because it sits between the two poles without committing to either; resist any editorial pressure in Phase 2 to “enrich” this phrase toward either “souvenir” or “mémorial.”
First-century temple-market and temple-dining social institution (chs. 8, 10)	No missing word, but a missing cultural referent: France has no contemporary practice resembling meat sold from pagan-temple sacrifices or dinner invitations held in temple dining rooms.	Not a translation gap but a literacy gap; supply mandatory background notes in curriculum material rather than attempting lexical compensation.
First-century congregational-discipline practice (ch. 5)	Similarly, no missing word for παραδοῦναι τῷ Σατανᷠ (“le livrer à Satan” is adequate), but most French readers (Catholic, Protestant, secular alike) have no living experience of a congregation exercising this kind of discipline, risking either import of remote canon-law procedure or dismissal as an alien practice.	Address at the teaching-note layer: describe the simple, restorative, congregational nature of the act explicitly rather than leaving readers to reconstruct it from vocabulary alone.

2B. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Active Fencing

These are cases where French supplies a stable, correct-looking word, but that word is already claimed by a competing referent, tradition, or register — the opposite problem from 2A. Each requires an explicit fence (a rule preventing the term from being read in its competing sense) rather than a different word.

French term	Competing occupant of the same word	Fence required
corps	(1) Eucharistic elements (ch. 11); (2) ecclesial body of Christ (ch. 12); (3) individual physical body (ch. 6); (4) resurrection body (ch. 15)	Every occurrence must be sense-tagged before translation, exactly as the baseline disciplines “appelé.” No single French synonym set exists to pre-disambiguate; disambiguation is entirely contextual and must be checked segment-by-segment in Phase 2.
Église	Institutional Catholic Church (dominant ordinary-usage sense) vs. Paul’s gathered-people/body sense (extremely frequent in this letter — over 20 occurrences)	Reinforce the gathered-people sense at high-frequency, high-visibility occurrences (1:2; 12:28; 15:9) with explicit teaching-note clarification; never let “l’Église” stand as though naming an institution or building.
saints	Canonized intercessors (feast days, statues, patronage — dominant French and Catholic-cultural sense) vs. Paul’s corporate-believer sense	Mandatory clarifying gloss “tous les croyants” at every occurrence (1:2; 6:1-2; 14:33; 16:1, 15), no exceptions, per baseline precedent — especially urgent at 6:1-2 where ordinary Corinthians, not an elite, are in view.
communion	The Eucharist specifically (“la communion” = receiving the sacrament, dominant Catholic-cultural sense) vs. shared participation/koinōnia (fellowship sense) vs. sacramental participation-in-Christ’s-body (10:16-18, an intensified third sense bridging the first two)	Never leave “communion” bare; qualify as “communion fraternelle” for the fellowship sense (per baseline) and treat 10:16-18 as a distinct intensified case requiring its own careful phrasing that neither collapses into ordinary fellowship nor imports full Catholic Eucharistic theology.
tradition / Tradition	Catholic doctrine’s capital-T “la Tradition” as a formal, co-authoritative, ongoing magisterial source of doctrine alongside Scripture	Lower-case, bounded rendering only (“tradition(s) reçue(s) des apôtres,” “l’enseignement transmis”); never let the bare noun stand unglossed at 11:2, 23 or 15:3, where Paul’s sense is a fixed, closed, apostolic-era deposit, not an open, developing category.
mystère	Fixed Catholic devotional category (“les mystères du Rosaire,” “le mystère eucharistique”)	Reinforce, via teaching note wherever it recurs (2:1, 7; 4:1; 13:2; 14:2; 15:51), the dynamic hidden-then-revealed gospel-content sense rather than a closed set of devotional formulas.
scandale	Media/political/moral scandal (dominant contemporary sense)	Never let “scandale” stand alone in exposition of 1:23; always anchor it explicitly to “pour la foi” / “à l’incrédulité” so the theological sense is not overtaken by the news-cycle sense.
chef / tête (κεφαλή)	“Chef” = institutional/corporate command (chef d’entreprise, chef d’État) — overstates hierarchy; “tête” = anatomically neutral but under-specifies authority for readers expecting a clear complementarian reading	Do not resolve by default; escalate to theologian ruling before Phase 2, per the registry’s existing flag. Whichever is chosen, document the choice as a deliberate editorial decision, not a silent default.
charité (rejected for ἀγάπη)	Organized almsgiving / financial generosity (une association caritative)	Never use as primary rendering of ἀγάπη in ch. 13; if it appears at all (e.g., quoting an older French tradition for comparison in a footnote), it must be explicitly marked as historical/comparative, not as this curriculum’s rendering.
calice (rejected for ποτήριον)	Catholic Mass’s specific liturgical vessel-name	Never use for the plain narrative “cup” of 11:25-28; reserve “coupe.”
réprouvé (rejected for ἀδόκιμος)	Reformed double-predestination “the reprobate”	Never use; reserve “disqualifié.”
la Pâque / Pâques	”La Pâque” (no s) = the Jewish/typological Passover Paul invokes at 5:7; “Pâques” (with s) = the Christian Easter feast — a purely orthographic, easily miskeyed distinction unique to French	Mandatory native-speaker proofreading pass specifically checking for the missing/extra “s” at every occurrence of this term; a single typo silently changes the referent from Passover typology to the Easter feast.
gnose (rejected for γνῶσις)	The ancient Gnostic heresy and its esoteric-elitist theological system	Never use; reserve “connaissance.”
vocation (rejected for the general believer’s appel)	Catholic clergy/religious-life calling (a vocation to the priesthood/religious life)	Reserve “vocation” only for the explicit ch. 7:20 state-of-life/occupational sense already flagged as an exception; never for the general effectual-calling sense elsewhere in the letter.

---

Part 3 — Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term	Decision	Rationale
Maranatha (16:22)	Transliterate: “Maranatha”	Follows the baseline’s “Abba” precedent for preserved Aramaic liturgical formulas; the term’s affective/liturgical force (an ancient invocation) would be lost in a bare translation (“Notre Seigneur, viens!”) standing alone, but the transliteration requires a mandatory explanatory gloss given near-zero prior exposure among secular and lapsed-Catholic French readers.
Abba (if quoted by cross-reference to Romans 8:15 in ch. 15/8 teaching material)	Transliterate: “Abba”	Already fixed in baseline; carry forward unchanged for any cross-referential use.
Amen / Alléluia (closing/liturgical material)	Transliterate in established forms: “Amen,” “Alléluia”	Per baseline transliteration standards; no paraphrase needed, these are already fully naturalized French Bible-liturgical vocabulary.
ἀγάπη (ch. 13)	Do NOT transliterate (reject “agapè” as a borrowed technical term)	Unlike Maranatha/Abba, ἀγάπη is not a proper noun or liturgical formula but Paul’s ordinary vocabulary word for a concept requiring integration into continuous French prose across an entire chapter; a transliterated “agapè” would read as a technical jargon insertion foreign to the target register (lycée-level narrative French) and would undermine, rather than aid, comprehension. Paraphrase into “amour” with teaching-note definitional support instead (see Part 1, doctrine 9).
ἔκτρωμα (15:8)	Paraphrase, not single-word transliteration or literal cognate	”Avorton” (literal cognate) carries an insult register unsuitable to Paul’s self-deprecating tone; a periphrastic paraphrase preserves the doctrinal force (undeserved, abrupt apostolic calling) without the register mismatch. See Part 2A.
κεφαλή (11:3)	Paraphrase into one of two competing single words (“tête” or “chef”) — pending decision, not transliteration	Transliteration is not viable for a common noun central to continuous argument; the decision is which French word to use, escalated to theologian ruling rather than resolved by default.
σῶμα καὶ αἷμα / ἀνάμνησις (11:24-25)	Paraphrase using existing plain French vocabulary (“corps et sang,” “en mémoire de moi”), deliberately avoiding any theologically “enriched” paraphrase	Any attempt to paraphrase more expansively (e.g., adding “réellement présent” or “symbole de”) would silently encode one eucharistic theology over the others; the safest choice is the plainest available paraphrase, not a transliteration (no Greek loanword exists here) and not an elaborated theological paraphrase.
πάσχα (5:7)	Paraphrase using the existing French Bible-tradition term “la Pâque” (not a transliteration of πάσχα itself, which is already the standard loanword ancestor of both “Pâque” and “Pâques”)	The translation choice is not transliteration-vs-paraphrase in the usual sense but orthographic precision within an already-established rendering; see the crowded-neighborhood fence above.
Χριστός as proper name vs. Messie as title	Both retained as distinct entries (per bible_term_registry.json): “Christ” transliterated/naturalized as the proper-name form; “Messie” reserved for explicit OT-fulfillment contexts	Consistent with baseline transliteration standard (Christ = Christ) while preserving the separate Messianic-title track for passages like 15:3-4 where fulfillment framing is explicit.

---

Part 4 — Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities in 1 Corinthians

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal stakes) and likelihood (how easily an ordinary translation choice drifts into error), highest risk first. All are Critical or High per the registry; this ranking is for reviewer prioritization within Phase 2, not a re-scoring of the registry itself.

1. κεφαλή / “tête” vs. “chef” (11:3) — Unresolved, mandatory theologian ruling required before any Phase 2 translation of ch. 11 proceeds. Highest risk because the ambiguity is genuinely unresolved at the source-document level (no default exists yet) and touches a live, contentious, cross-denominational debate.

2. σῶμα καὶ αἷμα / ἀνάμνησις — Lord’s Supper institution words (11:24-27) — Four distinct, mutually incompatible French Christian eucharistic theologies (Catholic transubstantiation, Lutheran real presence, Reformed real spiritual presence, evangelical memorialism) use the identical French words. The risk is not mistranslation in the usual sense but unintended theological encoding through word choice, syntax, or added qualifiers that silently favor one tradition.

3. σῶμα (corps) across four senses (chs. 6, 11, 12, 15) — The single most frequently recurring high-ambiguity term in the letter; every occurrence requires independent sense-checking, and cross-chapter proximity (11 to 12 especially) creates real risk of referent-bleed for readers moving through the curriculum sequentially.

4. ἀγάπη — “amour” vs. “charité” (ch. 13) — Highest risk of reviewer pushback rather than reader confusion: Catholic-formed theologian reviewers may specifically request or expect “charité” from memory of older liturgical French, requiring this decision to be pre-documented and defended, not discovered mid-review.

5. σκάνδαλον / “scandale” (1:23) erosion toward media-scandal sense — A slow, easily-missed drift risk: nothing “looks wrong” about the rendering, but the theological force silently attenuates unless actively fenced in every occurrence, an insidious risk precisely because it produces no obvious error signal.

6. “les saints” unglossed (1:2; 6:1-2; 14:33; 16:1, 15) — High-frequency, high-visibility risk of narrowing every believer to a canonized-intercessor elite; mitigated only by disciplined, repeated application of the mandatory gloss at every single occurrence, making consistency (not comprehension of the rule) the operational risk.

7. “l’Église” institutional/building drift (20+ occurrences) — Sheer frequency multiplies a moderate per-occurrence risk into a high cumulative risk; a single missed disambiguation note across sixteen chapters can quietly re-institutionalize Paul’s gathered-people ecclesiology for a reader.

8. σιγάω applied to women (14:34-35) — Compounds an ordinary translation decision (render literally) with an unusually active, multi-sided contemporary debate and a text-critical manuscript-placement question; risk is less in the base translation (which should stay plain) and more in downstream teaching-commentary overreach in either direction.

9. tradition / “la Tradition” collision (11:2, 23; 15:3) — A precise, well-known Reformation-era fault line; risk is elevated by the fact that the identical French capitalized or uncapitalized noun can silently shift doctrinal weight depending on typography and surrounding gloss, an easy point of inconsistency across a multi-translator Phase 2 workflow.

10. La Pâque / Pâques orthographic collision (5:7) — Lower doctrinal stakes than items above but uniquely high mechanical error probability: a single missing or added letter, easily introduced by autocorrect or a tired proofreader, changes Paul’s typological referent entirely. Ranked here specifically because it is the item most likely to slip through automated or cursory review undetected.

11. γλῶσσαι / “langues” continuationist-cessationist doctrinal loading (chs. 12, 14) — The word itself is stable and low-ambiguity; ranked lower than the above because the risk lives almost entirely in teaching commentary rather than in the base translation, but flagged here because the underlying charismatic/non-charismatic divide in French Christianity is exceptionally active and could still surface as translator/reviewer disagreement over surrounding phrasing.

12. ἔκτρωμα / “avorton” register mismatch (15:8) — Lowest-ranked Critical-adjacent item: the doctrinal content (undeserved, abrupt apostolic grace) is simple and unlikely to be lost outright, but pastoral register missteps are likely without the recommended periphrasis, warranting inclusion on this list as a “quiet” but real risk.

---

Summary for Phase 2 Handoff

• No chapter of 1 Corinthians is exempt from this analysis; every doctrine in the curriculum parameter list intersects at least one crowded-neighborhood or missing-vocabulary item documented above.
• The dominant risk pattern in this letter, distinct from Romans, is neighborhood crowding (too many competing, tradition-specific French words already available, especially around the Lord’s Supper and “corps”) rather than vocabulary absence (missing words) — the inverse emphasis from some non-European destination languages in this pipeline’s broader portfolio.
• Three items require mandatory pre-Phase-2 theologian rulings before translation may proceed on the affected chapters: κεφαλή (ch. 11), the σῶμα καὶ αἷμα/ἀνάμνησις eucharistic cluster (ch. 11), and the ἀγάπη vs. charité decision (ch. 13) — the last of these is already decided in the glossary but must be formally signed off, not merely inherited.
• All other findings in this document should be loaded alongside translation_memory.json, bible_term_registry.json, and doctrine_risk_registry.json at Phase 2 preflight, consistent with the baseline’s established pre-flight checklist structure.