Linguistic Gap Analysis: 1 Samuel — French

Purpose and Scope

This analysis identifies where French vocabulary is missing, ambiguous, or dangerously “crowded” with competing meanings for the 1 Samuel curriculum, and recommends translation strategies (direct term, qualified/fenced term, paraphrase, or transliteration) before Phase 2 segment translation begins. It extends the baseline Romans translation_memory.json/bible_term_registry.json and builds directly on 08_core_glossary.md and the 1 Samuel bible_term_registry.json already produced. No baseline or already-approved 1 Samuel rendering is altered here; this document explains the reasoning behind those choices in gap-analysis form and settles remaining open questions.

Full-book coverage (all 31 chapters) is confirmed in the Chapter Coverage Ledger (Section 6). The core passage, 1 Samuel 16:1-13, is the theological anchor for the doctrine vocabulary matrix but not the boundary of analysis.

---

1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

#	Doctrine	Available French Term(s)	Weaknesses / Collision Risk	Recommended Strategy
1	The Transition from Judges to Monarchy	juge (shophet), roi (melek), royaume (mamlakah)	“Juge” defaults to modern courtroom official in French; “roi/royaume” are lexically stable but readers may wrongly infer the institution of kingship was itself sinful (conflating it with Israel’s idolatrous motive, 8:5-7, and Saul’s personal disobedience, ch. 13/15). No French term captures the OT charismatic ad hoc “judge-deliverer” office without explanation.	Use “juge” and “roi/royaume” as direct terms (no better alternative exists), but mandate a teaching gloss distinguishing (a) the ad hoc, Spirit-raised judge from a permanent magistrate, and (b) Israel’s sinful motive for monarchy from the office of kingship, which God had already anticipated (Deut 17:14-20, outside this book but referenced in teaching notes). Cross-reference baseline “kingdom_of_god” to keep Saul’s/David’s human, revocable royaume distinct from God’s own eternal Royaume.
2	God’s Sovereign Choice of David	choisir (bāḥar, verb), élection (noun, baseline cross-ref)	“Élection” is High risk per baseline (ballot-box/democratic connotation); a noun rendering of the ch. 16 narrowing-of-candidates process would import a competitive, merit-based reading utterly foreign to the text (“le meilleur candidat gagne”).	Render the verb form (“le SEIGNEUR l’a choisi”) throughout the narrative; reserve “élection” strictly for doctrinal bridge-notes connecting this chapter to Romans 9-11. Pair with the “heart” (cœur) gloss so the choice is explicitly grounded in God’s evaluation of inner character, not external qualification.
3	Obedience versus Sacrifice (1 Sam 15:22)	obéir (shamaʿ), sacrifice (zevaḥ)	French splits Hebrew’s single root (shamaʿ = “hear” and “obey”) into two distinct words (“entendre” vs. “obéir”), which silently loses the wordplay that gives 15:22 its rhetorical force (“to hear is to obey”). “Sacrifice” alone risks NT-atonement over-reading if not flagged as the repeatable OT cultic act.	Translate as “obéir” but attach a mandatory translator’s note explaining the Hebrew hear/obey wordplay at every occurrence of shamaʿ in a doctrinally load-bearing context (15:1, 15:19, 15:22, 16:2 [informational “entendre” sense only]). Flag “sacrifice” with the note that this is Israel’s ongoing cultic offering, not a devaluation of Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice.
4	The Danger of Rejecting God as King	rejeter (māʾas), j’ai du regret/je regrette (nāḥam), un esprit mauvais [venu] de la part du SEIGNEUR (rûaḥ raʿah)	“Rejeter” is stable but the bidirectional mirror (8:7 Israel rejects God → 15:23/16:1 God rejects Saul) is invisible unless cross-referenced explicitly. Divine “regret” is the sharpest gap: Segond’s traditional “je me repens” imports human sin-repentance into God’s own action, a serious immutability problem for both Catholic and Reformed readers.	”Rejeter” used consistently both directions with an explicit cross-reference note. For nāḥam, reject “se repentir” outright; use “j’ai du regret / je regrette” (15:11) and “ne se dédit pas” (15:29), both requiring a mandatory theologian’s note on anthropopathic grief language vs. divine immutability — this is a Critical-risk item (see Ranked List, Section 5).
5	Faith versus Fear (David and Goliath)	confiance/se confier (batach), craindre/être terrifié (yareʾ/ḥatat), le Dieu vivant (ʾĕlohim ḥayyim)	No single French term equates to NT “foi/pistis” for OT batach; using baseline “foi” directly on ch. 17 risks implying a lexical, not merely doctrinal, equivalence between Testaments. “Le Dieu vivant” is stable but its polemical force (against literally lifeless idols, e.g. Dagon ch. 5) can flatten into generic devotional language.	Use “confiance/se confier” for batach in narrative text; use baseline “foi” only in doctrine-level teaching titles/commentary that explicitly frames this as a canonical bridge, not a term equivalence, per the existing glossary note. Preserve “le Dieu vivant” and reinforce its idol-polemic force in teaching notes (cross-ref ch. 5 Dagon, ch. 17 Goliath’s blasphemy).
6	The Anointed King as a Type of the Messiah	oindre (māshaḥ), l’oint du SEIGNEUR (mĕšîaḥ YHWH), Messie (baseline, cross-ref only), berger (rōʿeh)	The typological chain (oindre → l’oint du SEIGNEUR → Messie/Christ) depends on unbroken lexical consistency; any variant rendering (e.g. “consacrer” for māshaḥ in one place, “oindre” elsewhere) severs the link the whole doctrine depends on. “Messie” must never appear in the direct narrative translation of 1 Samuel itself, since the text never applies that title to David — doing so would be an interpretive insertion, not a translation.	Enforce absolute consistency: “oindre” for every occurrence of māshaḥ; “l’oint du SEIGNEUR” for every occurrence of mĕšîaḥ YHWH (chs. 16, 24, 26). Reserve “Messie” exclusively for accompanying doctrinal/teaching commentary that draws the typological line — never in verse-text translation. “Berger” preserved literally to carry the shepherd-boy → shepherd-king → Messianic-Shepherd trajectory.
7	Samuel’s Role as Prophet and Judge	prophète (navi, baseline), juge (shophet), homme de Dieu (ʾîsh ʾĕlohim), la parole du SEIGNEUR (devar YHWH)	Baseline already forbids “voyant” for prophet generally; 1 Samuel is the book where the literal cognate risk becomes concrete, since roʾeh (“seer”) is textually glossed in 9:9 as an older synonym for navi. Readers with low OT literacy will not know Samuel uniquely combined both offices (judge + prophet) in one person, a combination absent from Romans-only baseline experience.	Render roʾeh as “prophète” or “l’homme de Dieu,” never “voyant,” per baseline prohibition — now directly load-bearing rather than theoretical. Add an explicit teaching note on Samuel’s dual office (last judge, first of the classical prophets) since the baseline curriculum offers no precedent for a judge-prophet combined office.

---

2. Missing Vocabulary (No Ready French Equivalent)

These concepts have no single existing French word that carries the full semantic weight of the Hebrew; each requires either a multi-word phrase, a mandatory gloss, or a documented paraphrase.

Concept	Hebrew	Gap Description	Resolution
Hear = Obey (single root)	שָׁמַע (shamaʿ)	French “entendre” and “obéir” are two separate lexemes; the rhetorical punch of 15:22 depends on these being the same word in Hebrew.	Translate “obéir” in the doctrinal sense, with mandatory wordplay explanation note at every load-bearing occurrence.
Divine anthropopathic “regret” without implying moral fault	נִחַם (nāḥam, Niphal)	No French verb expresses “grieve over an outcome I sovereignly permitted” without either (a) implying moral failure (“se repentir”) or (b) sounding coldly clinical (“changer d’avis”).	Two-part paraphrase: “j’ai du regret / je regrette” (15:11) and “ne se dédit pas” (15:29), with theologian’s note on the tension.
Charismatic ad hoc deliverer-ruler (pre-monarchic “judge”)	שֹׁפֵט (shophet)	“Juge” defaults to a modern judicial/courtroom office; the OT sense (Spirit-empowered military-political deliverer who also arbitrates disputes) has no everyday French equivalent.	Retain “juge” (matches the book title convention, “le livre des Juges”) but mandate explanatory gloss on first appearance per lesson.
Hebrew anthropology of “heart” as intellect/will/character (not primarily emotion)	לֵב (lev)	Colloquial French “cœur” is pulled strongly toward sentiment/romance (“avoir bon cœur,” “un cœur brisé”), the opposite of the OT’s volitional-moral center sense.	Retain “cœur” (no better single word exists) but require the doctrinal gloss: “l’être intérieur, le caractère et la volonté devant Dieu” wherever ch. 16:7 is taught.
Israelite covenant-outsider designation, used pejoratively	עָרֵל (ʿarel)	“Incirconcis” is accurate but registers as either crude/clinical or theologically opaque to a French reader without covenant background; there is no natural conversational equivalent.	Retain “incirconcis” in Scripture quotation; supply contextual gloss in surrounding teaching prose (covenant-status marker, not mere physical description).
Formal, priest-mediated guidance-seeking distinct from personal prayer	שָׁאַל (shaʾal, “inquire of the LORD”)	French “prier” (baseline “prayer_and_intercession”) does not distinguish formal institutional consultation (via ephod/priest) from spontaneous personal prayer; conflating them erases a structural feature of Israelite religion.	Render “consulter/interroger le SEIGNEUR,” explicitly distinguished in teaching notes from baseline general prayer doctrine.

---

3. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (Fencing Required)

These French terms already carry strong, competing associations from Catholic tradition, secular culture, or French civic/political life. Each requires a fence — a qualifier, typographic marker, or mandatory gloss — to keep the biblical sense from being absorbed into the dominant neighbor meaning.

French Term	Competing Neighbor Meaning(s)	Fence Applied	Rationale
le Seigneur vs. le SEIGNEUR	Baseline “Seigneur” = Adonai/kyrios (Romans); ordinary French “seigneur” = feudal lord, “le seigneur du château”	Typographic distinction: small capitals “le SEIGNEUR” for YHWH throughout 1 Samuel; ordinary “le Seigneur” reserved for Adonai/address-of-respect contexts consistent with baseline.	Hundreds of tetragrammaton occurrences in 1 Samuel with zero precedent in Romans-only baseline; without this fence, readers cannot distinguish the covenant proper name from a generic title.
élection	Political/democratic elections (“les élections municipales”) — the single most dominant everyday sense of this word in French	Fenced to doctrinal cross-reference only; primary narrative rendering of bāḥar is the verb “choisir.”	Direct noun usage in ch. 16 narrative would read as “God ran a competitive selection process,” inverting the sovereign-grace doctrine entirely.
vocation	Catholic clergy/religious-life calling (“avoir la vocation”)	Never used for the general believer’s calling (per baseline); if 1 Samuel material ever discusses Samuel’s or David’s calling to office, use “appel” (baseline), not “vocation.”	Baseline already fences this; 1 Samuel’s narrative of prophetic/royal calling (Samuel ch. 3, David ch. 16) is exactly the kind of content that tempts drift toward “vocation.”
médium / spiritisme	Living, still-practiced French occult tradition (le spiritisme, Allan Kardec, 19th c. origin, ongoing cultural presence)	Never used; render baʿalat ʾôv as “nécromancienne / femme qui invoque les esprits des morts,” with mandatory theologian’s note.	This is the single sharpest culture-collision in the book: bare “médium” would directly map Endor onto a specific, still-active French religious-cultural movement, either normalizing it or provoking a defensive reaction.
se repentir	Human confession/contrition, sacramental penance in Catholic usage	Never used for God’s nāḥam; use “j’ai du regret/je regrette” and “ne se dédit pas” instead.	”Se repentir” applied to God would imply God sinned — a live doctrinal error risk in both Catholic and Reformed reading communities.
communion (bare)	The Eucharist (“la communion”)	Baseline already fences with “communion fraternelle”; 1 Samuel’s David/Jonathan covenant-friendship material must not use bare “communion” for their bond.	Any lesson drawing a fellowship parallel between David/Jonathan and NT koinonia risks the Eucharistic override without the fence.
vœu	Catholic monastic vow (“vœux de religion,” vows of a religious order)	Retain “vœu” for Hannah’s vow (ch. 1) but add a brief gloss distinguishing a personal vow to God from an institutional religious-order vow.	Without the gloss, French Catholic readers may hear Hannah’s vow as structurally equivalent to entering religious life, which is not the text’s point.
serment	Secular civic/legal oath (serment de témoin, serment présidentiel)	Retain “serment” for David/Jonathan’s oath (ch. 20) with a clarifying note that this is a sacred oath invoking God, not a civil formality.	The dominant modern sense is entirely secular-legal; the sacred, God-invoked character of the biblical oath needs explicit restoration.
Esprit Saint vs. l’Esprit du SEIGNEUR	Baseline “Esprit Saint” = NT permanent, personal, indwelling third Person of the Trinity	Fenced: OT temporary/revocable empowering (10:6,10; 11:6; 16:13-14; 19:20,23) always rendered “l’Esprit du SEIGNEUR,” never “Esprit Saint.”	Saul’s Spirit-departure (16:14) would be theologically catastrophic to teach as “the Holy Spirit left Saul” using NT-indwelling categories; the fence prevents readers from fearing their own NT indwelling is equally revocable.
gloire / saint	Baseline Christological “gloire,” ongoing NT “sanctification” doctrine	Retained exactly per baseline, but flagged: ch. 4’s departing kavod (Ichabod) and ch. 6’s ritual qiddesh (consecration before sacrifice) are distinct OT senses (departure-as-judgment; ritual one-time purification) from the baseline’s NT senses (Christ’s glory; ongoing sanctifying process).	Without the flag, reviewers may force NT theological categories onto OT ritual/narrative material that carries different weight and referent.
royaume	Baseline “Royaume de Dieu” (God’s own eternal, sovereign reign)	Fenced: Saul’s/David’s “royaume” (mamlakah) is a revocable human dynasty, explicitly said “shall not continue” (13:14) for Saul — categorically different from God’s Royaume.	Conflating the two would imply God’s own reign could likewise be forfeited, an entirely different and false doctrinal claim.

---

4. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decision Log

Term	Decision	Form Used	Rationale
אֵפוֹד (ephod)	Transliterate	éphod	No functional French equivalent for this specific priestly vestment; standard practice across French Bible traditions (Segond, TOB, BJ). Requires a one-time cultural gloss for a low-OT-literacy audience.
אוֹב / בַּעֲלַת־אוֹב	Paraphrase (never transliterate)	nécromancienne / femme qui invoque les esprits des morts	A transliterated or bare-cognate rendering (“médium”) would collide directly with the live French spiritisme tradition (see Section 3). Paraphrase is mandatory here, the opposite of the ephod decision.
מָשִׁיחַ (in the phrase “l’oint du SEIGNEUR”)	Paraphrase, not transliteration (“mashiah” is not used)	l’oint du SEIGNEUR	The baseline already establishes “Messie” as the transliteration-derived term for NT/typological use; 1 Samuel’s own narrative usage is a descriptive phrase (“anointed of the LORD”), not a titular proper noun, and must be paraphrased accordingly, reserving “Messie” for teaching commentary only.
אַבָּא (Abba, baseline cross-ref only)	Transliterate (per baseline; not applicable to 1 Samuel narrative text, no Aramaic “Abba” occurs in this book)	Abba (baseline retained, not reused in 1 Samuel translation)	No occurrence in 1 Samuel; included here only to confirm no false transliteration is introduced where the baseline term does not apply.
לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים (bread of the Presence)	Paraphrase	pain de la Présence	Descriptive phrase with a direct French equivalent; transliteration would produce an unrecognizable and unnecessary neologism.
קֶרֶן (horn, oil vessel)	Direct translation, not transliteration	corne	Ordinary vocabulary; note distinguishes the small oil-horn (16:1) from the ram’s-horn trumpet (shofar, not present in this passage).
Proper names (Samuel, Saul, David, Jonathan, Goliath, Eli, Hophni, Phinehas, Jesse, Nabal, Abigail, Endor, Gilgal, Ramah, Bethlehem, Gath, etc.)	Transliterate per established French Bible convention	Samuel, Saül, David, Jonathan, Goliath, Éli, Hophni, Phinéas, Jessé, Nabal, Abigaïl, Endor, Guilgal, Rama, Bethléem, Gath	Standard practice; use the form shared across Segond/TOB/BJ traditions where they agree, flagging any divergence (e.g., “Saül” with diaeresis is universal; no significant variant forms exist for these names as they do for Isaiah/Ésaïe in the baseline).
יהוה צְבָאוֹת (LORD of Hosts)	Paraphrase (compound phrase, not single-word transliteration)	le SEIGNEUR des armées	TOB convention preferred over Segond’s “l’Éternel des armées” to match this curriculum’s “le SEIGNEUR” tetragrammaton decision; requires contextual gloss against militarist/nationalist misreading.

---

5. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities (1 Samuel)

Ranked by combined doctrinal severity and probability of mistranslation/misreading, per the doctrine risk registry’s Critical/High tiers.

1. Divine “regret” (נִחַם / nāḥam, 15:11, 29) — Critical. Highest risk: the natural, traditional French rendering (“se repentir”) actively teaches false doctrine (that God sinned) rather than merely under-communicating nuance. Requires mandatory theologian review at every occurrence, no exceptions.
2. The tetragrammaton typography (“le SEIGNEUR” vs. “le Seigneur”) — Critical. Highest-volume risk: hundreds of occurrences per book; a single lapse into lowercase or unmarked “seigneur” anywhere in the text silently collapses the reader’s ability to distinguish the covenant name from a generic title of respect, undermining the entire book’s presentation of YHWH’s personal, covenant-keeping character.
3. Medium/necromancer at Endor (בַּעֲלַת־אוֹב, ch. 28) — Critical. Highest cultural-collision risk: direct, ongoing French religious-cultural practice (spiritisme) makes a casual mistranslation (“médium”) capable of either normalizing a condemned occult practice or provoking a defensive reaction from readers with personal/family ties to it.
4. “l’oint du SEIGNEUR” consistency (chs. 16, 24, 26) — Critical. The entire Anointed-King-as-Messiah typological doctrine collapses if this phrase is rendered inconsistently even once; unlike doctrinal content risks, this is a pure consistency risk that is entirely preventable but catastrophic if missed.
5. Obedience/hearing wordplay (שָׁמַע, 15:22) — Critical. The chapter’s central verse loses its rhetorical logic in French without an explanatory note, since “entendre” and “obéir” are lexically unrelated — the doctrine “Obedience versus Sacrifice” is argued from a wordplay that does not survive translation silently.
6. Spirit of the LORD vs. Esprit Saint (10:6; 16:13-14; 19:20-23) — Critical. Using the baseline’s NT term here would teach, by implication, that the Holy Spirit’s presence with believers today is as revocable as it was for Saul — a serious doctrinal distortion with direct pastoral consequences (assurance of salvation).
7. “Élection” bleed into ch. 16 narrative — High. The everyday political sense of “élection” is so dominant in French that even careful writers may reach for the noun form by habit; the doctrine of God’s sovereign, gracious choice would read instead as competitive selection.
8. “Rejeter” bidirectional mirror (8:7 / 15:23, 26 / 16:1) — High. If the same verb is not consistently used and cross-referenced in both directions, French readers — most with low OT narrative literacy per the baseline’s audience profile — will not perceive the deliberate structural parallel between Israel’s rejection of God and God’s rejection of Saul.
9. “Cœur” sentimentalization (16:7) — High. Without the mandatory gloss, “Dieu regarde le cœur” risks being heard as “God looks for someone emotionally warm/kind-hearted” rather than the text’s actual claim about comprehensive inner moral character and will.
10. “LORD of Hosts” militarist misreading (1:3, and throughout) — High. France’s own military history and the term’s plain vocabulary (“armées”) create a live risk of readers hearing an endorsement of nationalist warfare rather than God’s cosmic sovereignty over all powers, including but not limited to Israel’s armies.
11. “Royaume”/“roi” doctrinal over-reading (chs. 8, 13, 15) — Medium-High. Vocabulary itself is stable, but without explicit framing, readers may conclude the monarchy itself (not Israel’s motive, nor Saul’s disobedience) was the sin condemned — an inference the text does not support and later commends (David, and ultimately the Messianic king).
12. “Juge” courtroom-default reading (chs. 7, 8, 12) — Medium. Modern French “juge” evokes a magistrate; the ad hoc, Spirit-empowered deliverer sense of the pre-monarchic office requires explicit teaching, not assumption, especially for a biblically low-literacy audience per the baseline’s documented reader profile.
13. “Incirconcis” register mismatch (ch. 17) — Medium. The term is accurate but reads as either clinically medical or crudely insulting in casual modern French without the covenant-status gloss that gives the term its actual theological content in this text.

---

6. Chapter Coverage Ledger (Full-Book Confirmation)

Per PRD full-book-coverage mandate, every chapter of 1 Samuel has been reviewed for load-bearing terminology. Chapters not separately itemized in Sections 1-5 above are confirmed reviewed with no new load-bearing terms beyond those already logged in 08_core_glossary.md and the 1 Samuel bible_term_registry.json.

Chapters	Status	Notes
1	Reviewed — contributes terms	Hannah’s vow (neder), LORD of Hosts (first biblical occurrence)
2	Reviewed — contributes terms	Hannah’s Song (kavod/glory, horn as strength-metaphor), priestly sin (ḥeṭʾ/ʿavon, graver office-abuse sense)
3	Reviewed — contributes terms	Samuel’s prophetic call, “word of the LORD was rare” (devar YHWH), inspiration-of-scripture cross-reference
4	Reviewed — contributes terms	Ark battle, Ichabod, glory (kavod) departs — covenant-unfaithfulness consequence motif
5	Reviewed — contributes terms	Dagon’s collapse; idols (ʿatsabbim/pesel); polemic backdrop for “le Dieu vivant” (ch. 17)
6	Reviewed — contributes terms	Guilt/reparation offering (ʾasham) distinct from zevaḥ; holiness provoking fear (“who can stand before this holy God”)
7	Reviewed — contributes terms	Samuel judges Israel (shophet); Ebenezer — no new Critical/High terms beyond “juge”
8	Reviewed — contributes terms	Israel demands a king; God rejected as king (māʾas) — core doctrine #4 anchor
9	Reviewed — contributes terms	Saul seeks Samuel; “seer” (roʾeh) synonym for navi
10	Reviewed — contributes terms	Saul anointed (māshaḥ); Spirit of the LORD (rûaḥ YHWH) rushes on Saul; lots (goral)
11	Reviewed — no new load-bearing terms	Saul’s military victory confirms kingship; reuses established “roi,” “Esprit du SEIGNEUR”
12	Reviewed — contributes terms	Samuel’s farewell covenant-lawsuit address; witness (ʿed)
13	Reviewed — contributes terms	Saul’s unlawful sacrifice; folly (sakal); “the kingdom shall not continue” (mamlakah)
14	Reviewed — no new load-bearing terms	Jonathan’s exploits; reuses “lots” (goral) established in ch. 10
15	Reviewed — contributes terms	CORE doctrine chapter: reject (māʾas), divine regret (nāḥam), divination (qesem), obey/sacrifice (shamaʿ/zevaḥ)
16	Reviewed — CORE PASSAGE	Anointing of David: choose (bāḥar), heart (lev), outward appearance (marʾeh), Spirit of the LORD, shepherd (rōʿeh), consecrate (qiddesh), peace-greeting (shalom, social sense)
17	Reviewed — contributes terms	David and Goliath: living God (ʾĕlohim ḥayyim), fear/dismay (yareʾ/ḥatat), trust (batach), uncircumcised (ʿarel), LORD of Hosts reuse
18	Reviewed — contributes terms	David/Jonathan covenant (berit, human-friendship sense); jealousy (qinʾah); evil spirit (rûaḥ raʿah) continues on Saul
19	Reviewed — no new load-bearing terms	Saul’s persecution intensifies; reuses “Esprit du SEIGNEUR”/prophesying (hitnabbeʾ) established elsewhere
20	Reviewed — contributes terms	David/Jonathan oath (shevuʿah)
21	Reviewed — contributes terms	David flees to Nob: bread of the Presence (leḥem hapanim), ephod (introduced)
22	Reviewed — contributes terms	David’s fugitives gather; inquire of the LORD (shaʾal) introduced
23	Reviewed — no new load-bearing terms	Reuses “inquire of the LORD,” introduces “deliver” (hitsil, physical-rescue sense distinct from soteriological salut)
24	Reviewed — contributes terms	David spares Saul: “l’oint du SEIGNEUR” (kings_anointed_authority sense)
25	Reviewed — contributes terms	Nabal/Abigail: vengeance (neqamah), folly (naval)
26	Reviewed — no new load-bearing terms	David spares Saul a second time; reuses “l’oint du SEIGNEUR” established in ch. 24
27	Reviewed — no new load-bearing terms	David among the Philistines; no new Critical/High vocabulary
28	Reviewed — contributes terms	Saul and the medium at Endor: baʿalat ʾôv (nécromancienne) — highest cultural-collision term in the book
29	Reviewed — no new load-bearing terms	Philistines reject David from battle; reuses established “reject” vocabulary in a non-doctrinal military-logistics sense
30	Reviewed — contributes terms	David strengthens himself in the LORD (ḥazaq, hitpael) — Faith-versus-Fear doctrine resolution
31	Reviewed — no new load-bearing terms	Saul’s death; narrative closure, no new Critical/High vocabulary beyond terms already logged

Coverage confirmation: All 31 chapters of 1 Samuel have been reviewed. Chapters marked “no new load-bearing terms” are explicitly noted per the PRD mandate, not silently omitted; they reuse vocabulary already fenced and logged in the sections above and in the companion glossary/registry documents.

---

7. Summary of Open Decisions Carried Forward to Phase 2

1. “le SEIGNEUR” typographic convention must be mechanically enforced (not left to translator discretion) given its volume across all 31 chapters.
2. “l’oint du SEIGNEUR” and “oindre” require string-level consistency checks across chs. 10, 16, 24, 26 before any Phase 2 file is marked complete.
3. Divine-regret language (nāḥam) and the Endor necromancer (baʿalat ʾôv) are flagged as mandatory theologian-review items regardless of translator confidence, per the doctrine risk registry’s Critical-tier convention.
4. All doctrine-matrix “recommended strategies” in Section 1 are binding for Phase 2 segment translation and must be loaded alongside the baseline translation_memory.json and the 1 Samuel-specific bible_term_registry.json.