Linguistic Gap Analysis
Linguistic Gap Analysis — Gospel of John — English → French
0. Purpose and Method
This document performs the linguistic gap analysis required before core-glossary construction (Step 08) and doctrine analysis (Step 11) for the John curriculum. It answers three questions for French as the destination language:
- Where does French already have adequate, stable vocabulary for John’s theological content (inherited from the Romans baseline or from established French Bible tradition), and where are the residual weaknesses even in “adequate” cases?
- Where does French either lack vocabulary entirely (a semantic gap requiring paraphrase or transliteration) or have too much competing vocabulary (a crowded semantic neighborhood requiring deliberate fencing)?
- Which specific ambiguities carry the highest doctrinal risk for this curriculum’s nine named doctrines, given French secular, Catholic, and Protestant reading traditions simultaneously?
Coverage is full-book: every one of John’s 21 chapters is reviewed below, either as a contributor of new vocabulary or explicitly noted as reviewed with no new terms beyond material already logged.
Audience assumption, inherited from the baseline: practicing and lapsed/cultural Catholics, a small Protestant (Reformed/evangelical) minority, and biblically unchurched secular readers, with low Old Testament narrative literacy across all three groups. John’s Gospel raises this last concern significantly higher than Romans, since John’s Christology depends heavily on OT typology (tabernacle, temple, Passover lamb, Son of Man/Daniel 7, serpent in the wilderness) that Paul’s epistolary argument in Romans references more sparingly.
1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix
For each of the nine curriculum doctrines: available French terms (baseline-inherited and/or established Bible-tradition), their weaknesses, and the recommended strategy.
1.1 The Deity and Pre-existence of Christ (the Word)
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Dieu (baseline) | Secular/deist flattening; casual interjection use (“Mon Dieu!”) | Reuse baseline exactly; reinforce personal, triune referent in context, especially 1:1, 20:28 |
| Fils de Dieu (baseline) | None new; already Critical in baseline | Reuse exactly; John’s climaxes (1:34, 49; 11:27; 19:7; 20:31) require the same rigor as Romans |
| la Parole (new) vs le Verbe (competing tradition) | Genuine Protestant/ecumenical-vs-Catholic-liturgical fork; no single “correct” answer exists in French Bible history | Theologian decision required before Phase 2; recommend la Parole (Segond/TOB, broader ecumenical reach) with le Verbe logged as the rejected-but-documented alternative |
| Fils unique (new, for μονογενής) | Risks being heard as merely “favorite/special son” without catechesis | Pair with explicit teaching-note reinforcement of eternal generation, distinct from adoptive sonship |
| se faisait égal à Dieu (new, 5:18) | None significant; strong, unambiguous French | Retain literally; do not soften |
| Je suis (new, ἐγώ εἰμι) | Exodus 3:14 LXX echo invisible in standard French renderings (“Je suis celui qui suis”) | Mandatory footnote at each absolute-use occurrence (8:58; 18:5-6) cross-referencing Exodus 3:14 |
Gap identified: French has no single word that carries both “Logos” and “the pre-existent divine Person” without a decision between competing translation traditions. This is a forced choice, not a gap that paraphrase can dissolve.
1.2 The New Birth and Regeneration by the Spirit
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| naître de nouveau (new) | Loses the “from above” (ἄνωθεν) spatial sense entirely; French cannot carry both senses in one phrase | Primary rendering; mandatory translator’s note supplying the “from above” dimension at 3:3, 3:7 |
| renaître (rejected alternative) | Registers too close to a reincarnation-adjacent “rebirth into a new round of life” | Excluded entirely from base text |
| eau et Esprit (new, 3:5) | Direct collision with Catholic sacramental baptismal-regeneration reading vs. Reformed Spirit-alone reading | Render literally; do not resolve interpretively in base text; flag for theologian review |
| vent / Esprit (new, 3:8 wordplay) | Single Greek pneuma requires two French words; wordplay is destroyed | Mandatory translator’s note explaining the lost pun; the doctrinal point (sovereign, untraceable regeneration) must survive even though the wordplay cannot |
| enfants de Dieu (new) vs adoption filiale (baseline) | Risk of conflating John’s birth-metaphor with Paul’s legal-adoption metaphor | Teach explicitly as complementary, not identical, images |
Gap identified: No French phrase reproduces ἄνωθεν’s double meaning. This is an irreducible lexical gap requiring translator notes rather than a lexical solution.
1.3 Eternal Life through Faith in Christ
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| vie éternelle (new) | French philosophical tradition (Platonic-Cartesian dualism of an immortal soul) risks reading this as mere unending post-mortem survival, not qualitative, relational, present-tense life | Anchor consistently to “connaître” (relational knowing, 17:3), not “savoir” (propositional knowing) |
| croire (baseline foi-family; new as verb πιστεύω) | Highly exposed to casual, non-committal secular usage (“je crois que…” as a conversational hedge) | Reinforce trust/allegiance sense; especially “croire au/en son nom” (believe into his name) must not read as formula-invocation |
| pain de vie / eau vive (new) | Both risk being received as merely metaphorical/poetic without doctrinal weight; “pain de vie” additionally intersects live Eucharistic doctrine (6:53-58) | Translate literally; flag every 6:26-58 occurrence for mandatory theologian review; do not resolve sacramental-vs-symbolic debate |
| le chemin, la vérité et la vie (new, 14:6) | Exclusivity claim runs directly against French pluralist/laïque cultural default (all religions equally valid) | Must not be softened toward “un chemin, une vérité”; mandatory theologian review |
Gap identified: No genuine lexical gap here — the risk is entirely a crowded semantic neighborhood problem (French secular/philosophical vocabulary competing with the biblical sense of “life”).
1.4 God’s Love for the World
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| monde (new, κόσμος) | Same French word must carry both God’s love-object (3:16) and the hostile opposition-system (15:18-19) senses | Context must disambiguate explicitly in teaching material; do not silently resolve the tension present in the Greek itself |
| aimer (new, ἀγαπάω/φιλέω both collapse) | French has no lexical means, as English also lacks one, to preserve the Greek distinction | Mandatory translator’s note wherever the alternation is exegetically significant (esp. 21:15-17); 3:16’s ἀγαπάω itself is unambiguous and needs no note |
| Sauveur du monde (new, 4:42) | None significant | Retain unqualified universal scope |
1.5 Judgment and Belief/Unbelief
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| jugement / juger / condamner (new) | Strong French civil-judicial cultural resonance risks an impersonal, bureaucratic-court reading rather than a personal verdict tied to relationship with Christ | Reinforce personal, relational framing in surrounding teaching text, not the base translation itself |
| lumière / ténèbres (new) | Two live French collision risks: (a) historical Cathar/Albigensian dualistic cosmology (grounded in southern French religious history) and (b) Enlightenment “les Lumières” flattening light into abstract rationalism | Teaching notes must explicitly guard against a Manichean-equal-forces reading and reconnect “lumière” to Christ’s person (8:12), not abstract reason |
| colère de Dieu (new, 3:36) | Secular readers may domesticate wrath into mere disapproval | Retain judicial seriousness consistent with surrounding judgment vocabulary |
| qu’est-ce que la vérité? (new, 18:38) | Resonates strongly with Cartesian/postmodern relativist French philosophical tradition — risk of endorsing relativism rather than registering dramatic irony | Teaching notes must frame as Pilate’s blindness, not an open philosophical question |
1.6 The Seven “I Am” Statements
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Je suis (new) | Divine-name echo (Exodus 3:14 LXX) invisible without footnote | Absolute consistency across all seven predicate statements and both absolute uses (8:58; 18:5-6); mandatory footnote |
| pain de vie / le bon berger / le chemin la vérité et la vie / etc. (new, per-statement) | Each predicate carries its own separate risk (see relevant doctrine rows above) | Treat as one coordinated set; consistency across all seven statements is itself a doctrinal requirement, not merely a stylistic one |
1.7 The Holy Spirit as Counselor
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Esprit Saint (baseline) | None new | Reuse exactly |
| Défenseur / Consolateur / Paraclet (three-way competing tradition for παράκλητος) | Genuine, unresolved fork across French Bible history (Segond 1910 = Consolateur; TOB/modern ecumenical = Défenseur; Bible de Jérusalem = Paraclet, transliterated) | Theologian decision required; recommend Défenseur as the closest functional match to this curriculum’s own doctrine title “Counselor” (legal-advocate emphasis); log the other two as documented alternatives, applied with total consistency at 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7 |
| l’Esprit de vérité (new) | Compounds two already-flagged High-risk terms (Esprit, vérité) | No independent solution; risk is inherited, not new |
| convaincre (new, ἐλέγχω) | French leans toward mere intellectual persuasion in ordinary usage | Reinforce stronger judicial expose/convict sense in teaching material |
Gap identified: παράκλητος is the clearest forced three-way choice in this entire curriculum — French Bible tradition itself has never converged on one rendering.
1.8 Christ’s Substitutionary Death and Resurrection
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Agneau de Dieu (new) | Well-established French liturgical phrase (Agnus Dei); risk is dilution into a gentle/pastoral image losing sacrificial force | Reinforce sin-bearing, substitutionary function explicitly |
| élever (new, ὑψόω) | Risk of translator drift toward a purely physical (“hisser”, rejected) or purely honorific rendering, losing the deliberate crucifixion-as-exaltation paradox | Retain “élever” with total consistency across 3:14; 8:28; 12:32,34 |
| pour le peuple (new, ὑπέρ, 11:50-52) | A merely causal “à cause de” would lose the vicarious/substitutionary force | Use “pour” consistently for this substitutionary preposition |
| Tout est accompli (new, 19:30) | Established Segond rendering; risk that French readers hear exhausted resignation rather than triumphant legal/commercial completion | Retain established rendering; teaching notes draw out “debt fully paid” resonance |
| sang et eau (new, 19:34) | Live Catholic sacramental-typological reading tradition (baptism/Eucharist prefigured) | Translate literally; do not import the typological reading unbidden into base text |
| résurrection (baseline) | Secular-naturalist metaphorical flattening (“renaissance”, “rebond”) | Reuse exactly; John’s Christological intensification (11:25; ch. 20) raises practical teaching weight though the baseline rendering itself is unchanged |
1.9 Unity of the Father and the Son
| Available French terms | Weaknesses | Recommended strategy |
|---|---|---|
| nous sommes un / qu’ils soient un (new) | Must be guarded against both Arian/subordinationist softening (mere unity of purpose) and Sabellian/modalist over-reading (denial of Personal distinction) | Mandatory theologian review with explanatory footnote on both errors at 10:30 and 17:11, 21-23 |
| — (France-specific historical resonance) | 17:11, 21-23’s unity-prayer language carries live historical charge given the Wars of Religion, the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, and the Edict of Nantes/its Revocation | Must not be read or taught as a call for institutional church-merger; frame as ontological/relational unity, not ecclesiastical politics |
| demeurer (new, μένω) | Low collision risk; already a well-established devotional French term | Reinforce as dependent, ongoing relationship, not passive residency |
2. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods
2.1 Genuine Missing-Vocabulary Gaps (paraphrase or footnote required; no single French word suffices)
| Concept | Greek | Why French lacks a direct equivalent | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|
| ἄνωθεν’s double sense (“again” / “from above”) | γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν | French temporal (“de nouveau”) and spatial (“d’en haut”) adverbs are mutually exclusive; no French word carries both | naître de nouveau + mandatory translator’s note |
| πνεῦμα wordplay (wind = Spirit) | 3:8 | French, like English, lexically splits wind and spirit; the single-word Greek pun cannot survive | vent / Esprit + mandatory translator’s note explaining the lost pun |
| ἐσκήνωσεν’s tent/tabernacle imagery | 1:14 | Generic French “habiter/vivre” loses the OT Shekinah-glory tabernacle echo entirely | a établi sa demeure parmi nous + mandatory footnote (Segond’s “a habité parmi nous” logged as an acceptable but less vivid fallback) |
| ἀγαπάω vs. φιλέω lexical distinction | 21:15-17 | French, like English, has one general verb “aimer” for both | aimer + mandatory translator’s note at the one passage (21:15-17) where the alternation is exegetically load-bearing |
| Ἐγώ εἰμι’s Exodus 3:14 LXX echo | 8:58; 18:5-6 | Standard French renderings of Exodus 3:14 (“Je suis celui qui suis”) do not visibly connect to the shorter “Je suis” used in John | Je suis + mandatory footnote cross-referencing Exodus 3:14 at every absolute-use occurrence |
| υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου’s Daniel 7 apocalyptic-authority background | throughout | Low OT literacy audience will default to “a human being,” inverting the title’s force | Fils de l’homme + mandatory Daniel 7 cross-reference footnote |
2.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (French has too much competing vocabulary, requiring deliberate fencing)
| Term | Competing French associations | Fencing strategy |
|---|---|---|
| grâce (baseline, compounded here with vérité) | Catholic sacramental-mediation grace vs. Reformed sola gratia — inherited baseline tension, now compounded by the OT-covenant-loyalty (hesed we’emet) background of “grâce et vérité” (1:14,17) | Reuse baseline “grâce” exactly; add footnote surfacing hesed we’emet background at 1:14,17 specifically |
| vérité | Cartesian/Enlightenment rationalist “objective, propositional truth” vs. John’s relational, covenant-faithfulness sense | Reinforce relational sense explicitly at every High-frequency occurrence (14:6 especially); most acute at 18:38’s dramatic-irony question |
| jugement / juger | France’s prominent civil-legal culture defaults to impersonal court-process connotations | Reinforce personal, belief/unbelief-tied verdict in surrounding teaching text |
| chair | Everyday French “chair” over-connotes carnality/sensuality (“péché de la chair”) | Context must clarify John’s more neutral “merely human/natural” sense at 3:6, while permitting appropriately shocking concreteness at 1:14 against docetic softening |
| liberté / esclave (ἐλευθερόω / δοῦλος τῆς ἁμαρτίας) | France’s Republican “liberté” value and its own historical reckoning with the transatlantic slave trade | Frame bondage-to-sin/freedom-in-Christ carefully so as neither to trivialize French slavery history nor to let the verse be co-opted as a generic Enlightenment liberty slogan |
| élection / choisir (baseline, reused here for 6:70; 13:18; 15:16,19) | Everyday political/democratic “élection” | Same fencing as baseline: explicit contrast with competitive/merit-based choice wherever the term appears |
| berger vs. pasteur | ”Pasteur” is the ordinary French word for a Protestant minister; using it for Christ’s shepherd-title in the base biblical text risks a clergy-office collision, even though French Catholic devotional tradition independently and legitimately uses “le Bon Pasteur” | Use “berger” consistently in the base biblical text (ch. 10; 21:15-17); never “pasteur” as noun or verb-object in this role |
| Église / temple | French Protestants reserve “temple” for the building and “église” for the body; John introduces a THIRD sense — Christ’s own body as temple (2:19-21) — that must not be confused with either existing sense | Render 2:19-21 as “le temple (de son corps)” with explicit disambiguating note from the other two senses |
| Mon Dieu! / Mon Seigneur et mon Dieu! | Casual French interjection register vs. Thomas’s climactic worship confession (20:28) | Surrounding narrative context must make the confessional, worshipful force unmistakable; never allow the phrase to read as a surprise-exclamation |
| convaincre | Ordinary French sense = persuade intellectually | Reinforce judicial expose/convict force for the Spirit’s work (16:8-11) |
3. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions
| Term | Decision | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Logos (λόγος) | Paraphrase, forced choice between “la Parole” (recommended) and “le Verbe” | No transliteration tradition exists in French; both candidates are full paraphrases representing different theological-translation lineages. Theologian sign-off required. |
| μονογενής | Paraphrase: “Fils unique” | No transliteration option; “unigénitus”-derived Latinism has no live French Bible-translation tradition |
| παράκλητος | Paraphrase, three competing candidates (“Défenseur” recommended / “Consolateur” / “Paraclet” as a genuine transliteration alternative) | “Paraclet” is the one term in this entire curriculum where transliteration is a live, historically attested option (Bible de Jérusalem); still requires theologian decision among all three |
| ἐγώ εἰμι | Paraphrase: “Je suis” | No transliteration is possible for a self-predicating verb phrase; the loss (invisibility of the Exodus 3:14 echo) is handled by footnote, not by transliteration |
| Ἀββά (Abba, baseline) | Transliteration retained: “Abba” | Already fixed in the Romans baseline; John’s own use at no point requires re-litigation (Abba does not recur as a standalone term in John’s text beyond the baseline’s Romans 8:15 anchor) |
| Ἀμήν, Ἁλληλουϊά (baseline pattern) | Transliteration retained: Amen, Alléluia | Established forms; John’s repeated “Amen, Amen” (ἀμὴν ἀμὴν) formula should be rendered “En vérité, en vérité” per established French Bible tradition (Segond/TOB), NOT literally transliterated as “Amen, amen, je vous le dis” doubling, to match reader expectation — flagged here for Step 08 codification |
| Ῥαββί / Ραββουνί (1:38; 20:16) | Transliteration retained: Rabbi / Rabbouni | Established convention; John himself glosses both in-text (“which means Teacher”), so the base French translation should preserve both the transliteration and John’s own gloss |
| σκηνοπηγία (Feast of Tabernacles) | Paraphrase with explanatory gloss: “fête des Tentes (des Tabernacles)“ | No single-word French equivalent exists; low-doctrinal-risk cultural/historical footnote sufficient, not a doctrinal concern |
| Ἕλληνες (Greeks) | Direct translation, not baseline substitution: “Grecs” | Must not be replaced with baseline’s “païens” (which answers to a different Greek word, ἔθνη, absent from John); flag for translator awareness only |
| ἀμνός (Lamb of God) | Paraphrase using established liturgical French: “Agneau de Dieu” | Full lexical and cultural equivalent already exists (Agnus Dei tradition); no transliteration needed or appropriate |
General principle emerging from this section: John’s curriculum has markedly fewer genuine transliteration candidates than a comparison against, e.g., Hindi would produce, because French Christian vocabulary is already saturated with Latin/Greek-derived cognates. The live decisions are almost all paraphrase-vs-paraphrase forks within the existing French Bible-translation tradition (Logos, Paraclete), not transliteration-vs-paraphrase forks.
4. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities (This Curriculum)
Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × French-specific collision risk × frequency/curriculum-load-bearing status):
- παράκλητος / Counselor (14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7) — Unresolved three-way French Bible-tradition fork, directly named as one of this curriculum’s nine core doctrines (“The Holy Spirit as Counselor”). No decision yet exists; every subsequent document depends on it. Critical.
- λόγος / Word (1:1,14) — Same class of unresolved fork (Parole vs. Verbe), foundational to the curriculum’s first named doctrine and to the entire Gospel’s opening frame. Critical.
- ἐγώ εἰμι absolute uses (8:58; 18:5-6) — The single highest-value, most doctrinally load-bearing, and most invisible-without-intervention ambiguity in the curriculum: French readers have zero access to the Exodus 3:14 LXX echo without a footnote, and the curriculum names “The Seven I Am Statements” as a headline doctrine. Critical.
- ὕδατος καὶ πνεύματος / water and Spirit (3:5) — Sits inside the core passage itself (John 3:1-21) and is a live, unresolved Catholic-sacramental-vs-Reformed flashpoint of the same class as the baseline’s justification/grace disputes. High, elevated by core-passage centrality.
- γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν / born again-from above (3:3,7) — Also inside the core passage; genuine irreducible lexical gap (no French phrase carries both senses), directly naming this curriculum’s second headline doctrine. Critical.
- ἴσον ἑαυτὸν ποιῶν τῷ Θεῷ / equal with God (5:18) and ἓν ἐσμεν / unity of Father and Son (10:30; 17:11,21-23) — Both are explicit ontological-equality/unity claims vulnerable to opposite theological errors (subordinationism vs. modalism); 17’s unity language additionally carries unusually live French historical charge (Wars of Religion). Critical, tied.
- ὁδός, ἀλήθεια, ζωή / Way Truth Life exclusivity claim (14:6) — Direct collision with France’s pluralist/laïque cultural default; the temptation to soften “the only way” is a live, predictable pressure specific to this audience. Critical.
- ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς / Bread of Life discourse (6:26-58) — Direct textual basis for the Catholic Real Presence/Eucharist doctrine; the mixed Catholic-Protestant-secular audience makes this the single most denominationally sensitive extended passage in the Gospel. Critical.
- ἀφῆτε τὰς ἁμαρτίας / forgive sins (20:23) — Same Trent-vs-Reformation flashpoint class as the baseline’s justification entry; direct proof-text status for sacramental confession vs. proclamation-authority readings. Critical.
- ἀλήθεια / truth, especially compounded with vérité’s Cartesian-rationalist risk across 14 occurrences — Not a single-verse crisis but a pervasive, high-frequency risk of quietly flattening John’s relational-covenantal category into French philosophical propositional-truth vocabulary throughout the whole Gospel. High, elevated by sheer frequency and cumulative teaching impact.
Items 4–7 above fall inside or immediately adjacent to the core passage (John 3:1-21) and therefore carry additional priority for Phase 2 sequencing: any error here propagates through every downstream lesson built on the anchor passage.
5. Full-Book Chapter Coverage Confirmation
Every chapter of John has been reviewed for linguistic-gap contributions. Chapters contributing new load-bearing vocabulary are listed with their key terms; chapters contributing no new vocabulary beyond material already logged are noted explicitly.
| Ch. | New/escalated terms contributed | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Logos/Word, Fils unique, Agneau de Dieu, grâce et vérité, tabernacled/dwelt, enfants de Dieu, glory (verb-form escalation), Rabbi transliteration | Reviewed — contributes |
| 2 | signe, heure (first occurrence), temple (de son corps) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 3 | naître de nouveau, eau et Esprit, chair, vent/Esprit wordplay, vie éternelle, monde, colère de Dieu, Fils unique (3:16), ruler-of-the-Jews framing | Reviewed — contributes (core passage) |
| 4 | eau vive, adorer en esprit et en vérité, Sauveur du monde, signe (4:54) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 5 | se faisait égal à Dieu, jugement/juger/condamner, sabbat, sanctification (applied to Christ, foreshadowed), righteousness (rare occurrence anchor at 16:8,10 cross-referenced) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 6 | Je suis (pain de vie), attirer (draw), élection/choisir (6:70), action de grâce reuse | Reviewed — contributes |
| 7 | descendance de David, fête des Tentes, Grecs (first occurrence), heure (7:30) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 8 | Je suis (lumière du monde; absolute 8:58), libérer/esclave du péché, vérité (8:32), élever (8:28), heure (8:20) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 9 | — | Reviewed — confirmed no new terms beyond chapters 1–8’s vocabulary (light-of-the-world and Sabbath-authority motifs reuse existing entries) |
| 10 | Je suis (bon berger; 10:9,11), ἓν ἐσμεν unity (10:30), sanctification applied to Christ (10:36), élection/choisir | Reviewed — contributes |
| 11 | Je suis (résurrection et vie), action de grâce (11:41), pour le peuple/substitution (11:50-52), gloire (11:4) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 12 | élever (12:32,34), Grecs (12:20), signe (12:37), hardened hearts (12:39-40), Fils de l’homme (12:23,34), heure (12:23) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 13 | envoyé/apôtre-generic (13:16), commandement nouveau (13:34), élection/choisir (13:18), heure (13:1), gloire/glorifier (13:31), Fils de l’homme (13:31) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 14 | le chemin la vérité et la vie, Défenseur/Paraclet, Esprit de vérité, demeurer, paix (14:27) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 15 | Je suis (la vigne — implicit I Am), demeurer, élection/choisir (15:16,19), Défenseur/Paraclet (15:26), Esprit de vérité, aimer | Reviewed — contributes |
| 16 | convaincre, vaincre, Défenseur/Paraclet (16:7), Esprit de vérité (16:13), righteousness (16:8,10 — sole occurrence anchor) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 17 | ἓν ἐσμεν unity extension (17:11,21-23), gloire (17:1), vie éternelle (17:3), sanctification (17:17,19), mission | Reviewed — contributes |
| 18 | Je suis (absolute, 18:5-6), royaume qui n’est pas de ce monde (18:36), qu’est-ce que la vérité? (18:38) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 19 | Tout est accompli (19:30), sang et eau (19:34), Agneau typology confirmed (19:33,36), Fils de Dieu (19:7) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 20 | Mon Seigneur et mon Dieu! (20:28), pardon des péchés (20:23), thesis statement croire/vie (20:31), Esprit Saint reception (20:22), paix (20:19,21,26) | Reviewed — contributes |
| 21 | aimer (agapaō/phileō alternation, 21:15-17), pais mes agneaux/sois le berger de mes brebis | Reviewed — contributes |
All 21 chapters are accounted for; no chapter is silently omitted. Chapter 9 is the sole chapter confirmed to contribute no new terms, consistent with the semantic analysis this document precedes and informs.
6. Summary of Forced Decisions Requiring Theologian Sign-Off Before Phase 2
- Logos: la Parole vs. le Verbe
- Paraclete/Counselor: Défenseur vs. Consolateur vs. Paraclet
- Footnote policy confirmation for: ἄνωθεν double sense (3:3,7), Exodus 3:14 echo (8:58; 18:5-6), Daniel 7 background (Son of Man, throughout), tabernacle/Shekinah background (1:14), agapaō/phileō alternation (21:15-17)
- Non-resolution policy confirmation for sacramentally contested passages: water and Spirit (3:5), Bread of Life discourse (6:26-58), blood and water (19:34), forgive sins (20:23) — all to be translated literally without doctrinal disambiguation in the base text
These four decision points gate all downstream Phase 1 artifacts (07 Semantic Analysis, 08 Core Glossary, 11 Doctrine Analysis) and must be resolved before Phase 2 segment translation begins, per the pre-flight checklist in 12_ai_translation_requirements.md.