Linguistic Gap Analysis
Linguistic Gap Analysis — Judges
1. Purpose and Scope
This analysis identifies where French vocabulary is missing (no ready equivalent exists and one must be constructed, glossed, or transliterated) versus where French vocabulary is crowded (an existing term already carries strong competing senses from secular usage, Catholic devotional tradition, or the political/legal register, and must be “fenced” — restricted by gloss, capitalization, or qualifying phrase — to prevent the wrong sense from being read).
Judges presents a distinct linguistic profile from Romans: it is OT narrative, not NT epistolary argument; its central offices (judge, king) and its central refrain (evil in the LORD’s eyes vs. right in one’s own eyes) have no direct baseline precedent; and its readership — the same tri-partite French audience profile as the baseline (practicing/lapsed Catholics, a Protestant minority, secular unchurched readers with low OT literacy) — will bring different false-friend risks to bear than they did for Romans’ more abstract soteriological vocabulary.
2. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix
2.1 The Cycle of Sin, Judgment, and Deliverance
| Element | Available French Terms | Weaknesses | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sin (act) | péché (baseline reused) | Colloquial trivialization (“péché mignon”) | Reuse baseline exactly; reinforce gravity with “trahison de l’alliance” gloss in doctrine notes, ch. 2, 10 |
| Judgment (divine handing-over) | livrer / vendre entre les mains de | No natural French idiom for judicial “selling” into an oppressor’s power; literal calque risks sounding like slave-market commerce without context | Retain literal “vendit/livra entre les mains de” with a standing footnote naming this as covenant-curse discipline (Deut 28), cross-referenced to Romans 1:24-28’s paradidōmi pattern already in the baseline |
| Deliverance (human, repeatable) | délivrer / sauver | Same word-family as baseline’s Critical “salut” (Christ’s once-for-all salvation) | Fence explicitly: teaching notes must state these are partial, repeatable, human rescues that anticipate but do not constitute the salvation doctrine of Romans |
| Cyclical structure itself | cycle (loanword, transparent) | None significant; “cycle” is a stable, transparent French loanword | Use “le cycle” freely as an organizing meta-term; not itself a biblical-text term requiring registry entry |
| Compassion triggering deliverance | ému de compassion | Secular reading risks emotional-instability framing of God | Fence with “compassion fidèle à l’alliance” gloss, ch. 2, 10 |
Assessment: No missing vocabulary; primary risk is crowded neighborhood around “sauver/délivrer” bleeding into the baseline’s Critical salvation doctrine. Fencing required, not new coinage.
2.2 The Absence of a Righteous King (“everyone did what was right in his own eyes”)
| Element | Available French Terms | Weaknesses | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Refrain itself | chacun faisait ce qui lui semblait bon / ce qui était droit à ses propres yeux | Contemporary French individualist culture treats personal autonomy (“je fais ce qui me semble bon”) as an unqualified positive; the negative, indicting force is not self-evident from the words alone | Mandatory theologian-reviewed identical rendering at 17:6 and 21:25 (per 08_core_glossary); pair every occurrence with explicit contrastive gloss pointing back to “le mal aux yeux du SEIGNEUR” (2:11) |
| King (absent office) | roi | Neutral-to-negative political connotation in secular French (monarchy abolished 1848/1870, no live positive resonance) | Frame teaching notes to distinguish “absence of any king” from “absence of a righteous king”; the doctrine is not anti-monarchical polemic |
| No king in Israel (refrain) | il n’y avait pas de roi en Israël | None significant — transparent, low ambiguity | Render identically at all 4 occurrences (17:6, 18:1, 19:1, 21:25) per baseline consistency precedent |
| Right/righteous standard (God’s vs. human) | droit / le mal — contrastive pair | French “droit” (legal/moral rightness) and “juste” both compete for this slot; using “juste” risks collision with baseline’s Critical “justice/justification” vocabulary from Romans | Reserve “juste/justice” strictly for the Romans forensic-righteousness sense; use “droit” (as adjective, not noun) for Judges’ evaluative refrain to keep the two doctrinal fields lexically distinct |
Assessment: The refrain is this curriculum’s single highest ambiguity risk (see Section 5, #1). Not a missing-vocabulary problem — French has adequate words — but a values-inversion risk: the plain French reading trends toward affirming what the text condemns.
2.3 God’s Grace through Flawed Deliverers
| Element | Available French Terms | Weaknesses | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grace (theological) | grâce (baseline reused, High risk) | Baseline already documents Catholic sacramental-mediation vs. Reformed sola gratia tension | No new risk introduced by Judges; reuse baseline exactly. Apply specifically to God’s choice of morally compromised deliverers (Jephthah, Samson) as grace operating despite, not because of, merit |
| Flawed deliverer (Jephthah, Samson, Gideon, etc.) | libérateur imparfait / juge faillible (constructed phrase, no fixed biblical-translation precedent) | No single-word French equivalent exists; risk is silence — a study curriculum that does not name this tension explicitly may let readers assume uncritical hero-narrative reading | Coin and standardize a Judges-specific descriptive phrase — “juge faillible” or “libérateur imparfait” — for consistent use across all doctrine-note material (not a Bible-text rendering, so no registry risk-tier needed, but should be used consistently) |
| Vow (Jephthah’s) | vœu (Critical, baseline core glossary) | Risk of implying divine approval of human sacrifice if resolved too neatly | Mandatory theologian review; text presents, does not endorse |
| Judge (office) | juge (Critical) | Courtroom-magistrate false friend | Standing gloss on first use in every document (see 2.4 crowded-neighborhood note below) |
Assessment: The doctrinal concept (grace operating through flawed agents) has no single French lexical gap — it is fully expressible — but the curriculum needs a standardized descriptive phrase, not found in any existing Bible translation, to name the pattern consistently across lessons.
2.4 Apostasy and Covenant Unfaithfulness
| Element | Available French Terms | Weaknesses | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apostasy (as a named doctrine) | apostasie (loanword, transparent) | Fairly rare in ordinary spoken French but standard in French theological/academic register; some secular readers may need a first-use gloss | Use “apostasie” as the doctrine label with a one-time gloss (“abandon délibéré de l’alliance avec Dieu”) in teaching material headers |
| Abandoned/forsook | abandonnèrent (High, core glossary) | Reads as passive neglect, not active betrayal | Pair with marital-infidelity metaphor (below) in the same sentence wherever possible |
| Played the whore after | se prostituèrent (en allant après…) (High) | Risk of either over-softening (bland “infidélité”) or over-literalizing into a claim purely about sexual sin | Preserve the marital-covenant metaphor intact; footnote clarifying this is Hosea-family covenant-infidelity language, not a moral judgment about literal sexual conduct |
| Went after / bowed down | allèrent après / se prosternèrent devant (High) | “Adorer” is the default French verb for any reverential worship act and would collapse the true/false worship distinction if used for both | Fence: reserve “adorer” exclusively for legitimate worship of God across the whole curriculum; idol-directed acts always rendered “se prosterner devant” |
| Baals/Ashtaroth/Dagon | les Baals / les Ashtaroth / Dagon (Medium) | Meaningless proper nouns to a low-OT-literacy readership without explanation | Footnote cultural/religious background at first occurrence per document |
| Covenant | alliance (baseline reused, High) | None new; stable | Reuse exactly |
Assessment: Core apostasy vocabulary is adequately covered by existing French religious vocabulary, but several terms sit in crowded neighborhoods (adorer, servir) that must be fenced by consistent verb-choice discipline rather than by new coinage.
2.5 The Spirit’s Empowering of Judges
| Element | Available French Terms | Weaknesses | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spirit of the LORD (episodic empowerment) | l’Esprit du SEIGNEUR (High) | Identical surface phrase to baseline’s permanent NT “Esprit Saint” indwelling; French has no separate lexeme marking temporary vs. permanent divine empowerment | Missing vocabulary gap: no French term distinguishes OT charismatic empowerment from NT Pentecostal indwelling. Resolve by consistent use of the fuller construction with task-specific verbs (“vint sur,” “revêtit,” “se précipita sur”) rather than a bare noun phrase, plus a mandatory continuity/discontinuity teaching note at every occurrence (ch. 3, 6, 11, 13, 14, 15) |
| Nazirite | naziréen (High) | Near-homophone collision with “nazaréen” (of Nazareth) — a genuine French-specific gap with no clean fix except disambiguation | Standing footnote at every occurrence (ch. 13, 16); never leave unglossed |
| Sign (Gideon’s fleece) | signe (Medium) | Adequate lexically; risk is normative-model misuse in application/teaching, not translation | Teaching caution note, not a translation fix |
| Holy (Nazirite consecration) | saint (Medium, narrower application of baseline) | Baseline’s High corporate-sainthood risk is reduced but not absent in this individual-consecration sense | Reuse baseline term; note narrower referent |
Assessment: This doctrine contains the curriculum’s clearest true missing-vocabulary case — French genuinely lacks a way to mark episodic/temporary vs. permanent divine empowerment within the single phrase “Esprit du Seigneur/Esprit Saint.” This must be compensated by syntactic and paratextual strategy, not lexical substitution.
2.6 Moral Decline and the Need for a Righteous King
| Element | Available French Terms | Weaknesses | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| More corrupt than their fathers (escalation) | se corrompirent plus que leurs pères (High) | Flat translation risks reading as static repetition rather than escalating decline | Preserve comparative construction explicitly at every occurrence; do not simplify to a repeated flat clause |
| No king in Israel (refrain) | il n’y avait pas de roi en Israël (High) | See 2.2 | Identical rendering at all 4 occurrences |
| King / anoint (Abimelech, negative foil) | roi / oindre (High) | Etymological link to Critical baseline “Messie” risks false positive association with messianic dignity | Explicit teaching-note contrast: Abimelech’s illegitimate, fratricidal kingship is a negative foil, not a template, for the future righteous king |
| Wickedness / vile outrage (Gibeah) | infamie / chose ignoble (Medium-High) | Adequate lexically; risk is losing the deliberate Genesis 19 literary echo | Cross-reference footnote to Genesis 19 required at ch. 19 |
| Assembly (qahal, civil war) | l’assemblée (d’Israël) (High) | Bare “Église” would wrongly suggest the institutional Christian Church | Retain “l’assemblée (d’Israël),” never bare “Église,” at ch. 20 |
Assessment: No missing vocabulary; the doctrine’s risk is entirely in preserving structural/comparative force (escalation, refrains, literary echoes) that a flatter, simpler French rendering could silently erase.
3. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods
3.1 Genuinely Missing Vocabulary (no adequate existing French term)
| Concept | Why French Lacks a Direct Equivalent | Compensation Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Episodic/temporary Spirit-empowerment vs. permanent NT indwelling | French “Esprit” vocabulary does not grammatically or lexically mark duration/permanence of divine empowerment | Verb-phrase specificity + mandatory teaching note (see 2.5) |
| shophet as charismatic deliverer-governor (not magistrate) | “Juge” is irreversibly a courtroom-magistrate word in modern French; no dormant older sense survives in ordinary usage | Standing explanatory gloss on first use every document (see 08_core_glossary, Critical tier) |
| “Flawed deliverer” as a named theological category | No fixed phrase exists in French Bible-translation tradition (this pattern is not named as such in Segond/TOB/BJ apparatus) | Coin and standardize “juge faillible” / “libérateur imparfait” for curriculum-internal doctrine-note use only (not a Scripture-text rendering) |
| The neder/vow’s binding, tragic ambiguity (11:30-31, 39) | French “vœu” is adequate lexically but carries no built-in signal of the interpretive dispute (literal sacrifice vs. lifelong seclusion) | Resolve via paratext (footnote flag), not via lexical choice; do not let translation silently pick a side |
3.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing
| French Term | Competing Senses Already Active in French | Fencing Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| juge | Courtroom magistrate (juge d’instance/d’instruction) — dominant, unavoidable | Standing gloss every first occurrence per document; never use unqualified |
| roi | Post-revolutionary neutral-to-negative political term; no positive default resonance | Explicit “not a blanket anti-monarchy statement” framing note wherever the doctrine “Absence of a Righteous King” is taught |
| adorer / servir | Secular “servir” = generic helpfulness/employment; “adorer” used loosely for any admiration (“j’adore ce film”) | Reserve theological register explicitly: “adorer” only for true worship of God, “se prosterner devant” for idol-directed acts, “servir fidèlement le SEIGNEUR” always qualified, never bare “servir” |
| connaître | Casual-acquaintance sense dominant (“je connais cette personne”) | Always pair “ne connaissaient pas le SEIGNEUR” with relational/covenantal gloss, not left to stand as mere informational ignorance |
| Église / assemblée | ”Église” = institutional Catholic Church by default | Reserve “l’assemblée (d’Israël)” for the qahal referent (ch. 20); never substitute bare “Église” |
| élection-adjacent verbs (choisir, susciter) | “Élection” itself (baseline High risk) not directly needed in Judges, but any verb implying human choice-of-leader must avoid suggesting a democratic/electoral process | Use “le SEIGNEUR fit surgir des juges” (sovereign-initiative construction), never a verb suggesting Israel selected its own judges |
| saint / naziréen | ”Saint” = canonized-intercessor default (baseline High); “naziréen” = homophone collision with “nazaréen” | Reuse baseline fencing for “saint”; standing disambiguation footnote for “naziréen” at every occurrence |
| oindre | Etymological root of Critical “Messie” | Contrastive teaching note wherever Abimelech’s anointing (ch. 9) appears, to prevent false positive messianic association |
| mal / droit (evil / right, evaluative pair) | Secular moral relativism reads “le mal” as social-consensus wrongdoing, not objective divine standard; “droit”/individual autonomy reads positively by default | Contrastive pairing required at every occurrence: “le mal aux yeux du SEIGNEUR” (2:11) must textually echo against “ce qui était droit à ses propres yeux” (17:6; 21:25) so French readers see the deliberate antithesis |
| tenter / mettre à l’épreuve | ”Tenter” carries strong enticement-to-sin connotation | Reserve “mettre à l’épreuve” exclusively for divine character-testing (2:22; 3:1,4); never “tenter” |
| héritage | Shared with baseline’s NT spiritual-inheritance sense (Romans 8:17) | Keep strictly literal tribal-land referent in Judges 1-2; do not import NT spiritual sense into teaching notes for this book |
4. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions
| Term | Decision | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| YHWH (divine name) | Transliteration convention, typographically marked: “le SEIGNEUR” (majuscules) | Marks the Tetragrammaton distinctly from the generic κύριος confessional title reused from the baseline; reviewer must confirm against Segond’s “l’Éternel” alternative before Phase 2, but this curriculum defaults to the ecumenical TOB/BJ small-caps convention for consistency with the baseline’s broader French register choice |
| Baal / Ashtaroth / Dagon | Transliteration + footnote | Proper divine names with no French equivalent; paraphrasing (“false gods”) would erase the specific historical-religious referent the text requires |
| Nazirite (nazir) | Transliteration (“naziréen”) + mandatory disambiguating footnote | No paraphrase captures the specific vow-category; transliteration is unavoidable but carries the homophone risk with “nazaréen” that must be managed paratextually, not lexically |
| Ephod | Transliteration (“éphod”) + footnote | Technical cultic-object term; paraphrase (“priestly garment” or “idol”) would either lose the term’s dual legitimate/illegitimate usage across Exodus 28 and Judges 8/17-18, or prejudge the theological point |
| shophet / judge (office) | Paraphrase-supplemented lexical choice: retain “juge” (established registry term) but require a standing explanatory paraphrase gloss on first use | Full transliteration (“shophet”) was considered and rejected: it would be unintelligible to lay French readers and break continuity with existing French Bible translation tradition, which uses “juge” throughout Segond/TOB/BJ. Retaining “juge” with mandatory gloss balances fidelity to existing French Bible tradition against the courtroom-magistrate false-friend risk |
| ”right in his own eyes” refrain | Full paraphrase, no transliteration possible | Idiomatic Hebrew construction with no single French lexeme equivalent; existing French Bible tradition itself paraphrases this (Segond: “ce qui lui semblait bon”; TOB/BJ: “ce qui était droit à ses propres yeux”) — curriculum follows established Bible-translation paraphrase practice rather than inventing a new one |
| Teraphim | Transliteration (“idoles domestiques (teraphim)”) + footnote, not pure paraphrase | A pure paraphrase (“household idols”) alone would lose the specific technical term some readers researching further will encounter in study Bibles; retaining the transliterated term in parentheses aids cross-reference without requiring it to carry doctrinal weight alone |
| Abba-style retained terms (n/a directly in Judges, cf. baseline) | N/A | No equivalent untranslated-Aramaic-retention case arises in Judges; noted for completeness only |
| ”angel of the LORD” | No transliteration; standard lexical rendering (“l’ange du SEIGNEUR”) with theological flag, not paraphrase | Neither transliteration nor paraphrase resolves the underlying Christophany-identity ambiguity; the correct strategy is flagging for theologian review at each occurrence rather than attempting a translation-level fix |
5. Ranked List of This Curriculum’s Highest-Risk Ambiguities
Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × likelihood of misreading in French) and mapped to the six core doctrines.
- “Everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (17:6; 21:25) — Absence of a Righteous King / Moral Decline. Contemporary French individualism inverts the text’s negative force into an apparent positive; this is the book’s thesis-equivalent statement and the single highest risk in the curriculum. Critical.
- “Evil in the sight of the LORD” vs. “right in his own eyes” contrastive pair (2:11 vs. 17:6/21:25) — Cycle / Moral Decline. If the deliberate antithesis is not visibly preserved across both refrains, the entire structural argument of the book collapses for the French reader. Critical.
- Judge (shophet) as office — Cycle / Flawed Deliverers. The single most frequent and load-bearing OT technical term in the book; the courtroom-magistrate false friend is nearly unavoidable without constant standing glosses. Critical.
- Jephthah’s vow (11:30-40) — Flawed Deliverers / Moral Decline. Highest theological-harm-if-mishandled risk: a careless rendering risks implying divine sanction for human sacrifice. Critical.
- Spirit of the LORD vs. Esprit Saint (permanent NT indwelling) — Spirit’s Empowering. A genuine missing-vocabulary gap (Section 3.1); French cannot lexically mark the OT/NT discontinuity, so risk of Pentecostal-permanence misreading is structurally built into any translation choice. High.
- Angel of the LORD (2:1-5; 6:11-24; 13:3-21) — Cycle / Spirit’s Empowering. The Christophany question is genuinely underdetermined in the source text itself; French “ange” forecloses the ambiguity toward “created being only.” High.
- “The LORD raised up judges” vs. any construction implying election — Cycle. Direct collision with the baseline’s already-documented High-risk “élection” (political/democratic default sense); a careless verb choice could make Judges appear to teach a proto-democratic leadership model. High.
- le SEIGNEUR (YHWH) vs. Seigneur (generic κύριος) — Apostasy / Cycle. Extremely high-frequency term (dozens of occurrences per chapter); any typographic inconsistency across curriculum documents is immediately visible and undermines the covenant-name/confessional-title distinction. Critical (frequency-driven; see baseline registry entry
lord_yhwh). - Gideon’s refusal of kingship (8:23) — “the LORD shall rule over you” — Absence of a Righteous King. Positive theological high point of the book; risk is under-teaching its contrast with the book’s overall trajectory toward monarchy, given how naturally “roi” reads neutrally in secular French. High.
- Abimelech’s anointing (ch. 9) and the χρίω/Messie root link — Absence of a Righteous King. Risk of false positive messianic dignity attaching to an illegitimate, negative narrative foil unless explicitly flagged. High.
- “Played the whore after other gods” (2:17; 8:27,33) — Apostasy. Risk of either over-softening into bland infidelity language or over-literalizing into a purely sexual-morality reading, losing the marital-covenant metaphor. High.
- Nazirite / naziréen vs. nazaréen homophone — Spirit’s Empowering / Moral Decline. A narrowly French-specific orthographic collision risk with no clean resolution except constant footnoting. High.
- “More corrupt than their fathers” escalation (2:19) — Moral Decline. Risk of flattening the book’s downward-spiral structure into a static repeating cycle if the comparative force is lost. Medium-High.
- Assembly/qahal (ch. 20) vs. baseline Église — (cross-doctrine, Church link). Risk of anachronistic institutional-Church reading if rendered with bare “Église.” High.
- Gideon’s ephod (8:27) — legitimate priestly garment vs. idolatrous object — Apostasy / Flawed Deliverers. Requires a footnote every occurrence or the technical term is simply opaque. Medium.
6. Full-Book Chapter Coverage Confirmation
Per the PRD’s full-book coverage mandate, every chapter of Judges has been reviewed for linguistic-gap content. Chapters contributing no new terms beyond those already logged above are noted explicitly rather than silently omitted.
| Chapter | Coverage Status |
|---|---|
| 1 | Reviewed — inheritance/land (héritage), drive out/dispossess, Canaanites, forced labor/tribute (Section 2.1/2.6, Missing-Vocabulary §3.1 n/a here — adequately covered by existing terms) |
| 2 | Reviewed — core chapter for this curriculum; supplies the majority of terms across Sections 2.1, 2.4, 2.6 (le SEIGNEUR, abandoned/forsook, played the whore, anger kindled, gave into hand of, moved to pity, more corrupt than fathers, cried out, raised up judges, evil in sight of LORD, did not know the LORD, commandments, served the LORD, another generation, test/prove, snare/trap) |
| 3 | Reviewed — Spirit of the LORD (Othniel, 3:10), cried out to the LORD; no new terms beyond Section 2.1/2.5 |
| 4 | Reviewed — prophetess (Deborah); no new terms beyond Section 2.5’s Low-risk entry |
| 5 | Reviewed — curse/blessed pairing (Song of Deborah); no new terms beyond Section 2.6 |
| 6 | Reviewed — Spirit of the LORD (Gideon), angel of the LORD, sign/fleece; no new terms beyond Sections 2.5, 5 |
| 7 | Reviewed — no new doctrinally load-bearing terms beyond those already logged (battle narrative; “the LORD” frequency continues per item 8 above) |
| 8 | Reviewed — “the LORD shall rule over you” (Gideon’s refusal), snare/trap (ephod), played the whore after (idolatry via ephod); Section 2.2, 2.4 |
| 9 | Reviewed — king, anoint, curse/blessed (Jotham’s fable); Section 2.2, 2.6 |
| 10 | Reviewed — we have sinned confession, the LORD’s soul could not bear, moved to pity (parallel to ch. 2); Section 2.1 |
| 11 | Reviewed — vow (Jephthah), the LORD as Judge, Spirit of the LORD; Section 2.3, 2.5 |
| 12 | Reviewed — no new doctrinally load-bearing terms beyond judge-office and inter-tribal conflict vocabulary already logged |
| 13 | Reviewed — Nazirite, Spirit of the LORD, angel of the LORD, holy; Section 2.5 |
| 14 | Reviewed — Spirit of the LORD (rushed upon Samson); no new terms beyond Section 2.5 |
| 15 | Reviewed — Spirit of the LORD; no new terms beyond Section 2.5 |
| 16 | Reviewed — Nazirite (vow broken), Dagon; Section 2.5, 2.4 |
| 17 | Reviewed — “right in his own eyes” refrain (17:6), “no king in Israel” refrain, carved/molten images/teraphim; Section 2.2, 2.4, 2.6 |
| 18 | Reviewed — “no king in Israel” refrain; carved images (Danite migration); no new terms beyond Section 2.2, 2.4 |
| 19 | Reviewed — concubine, wickedness/vile outrage (Gibeah, Genesis 19 echo), “no king in Israel” refrain; Section 2.6 |
| 20 | Reviewed — assembly/qahal, lots; Section 2.6, and Crowded-Neighborhoods §3.2 (Église fencing) |
| 21 | Reviewed — “right in his own eyes” refrain (21:25, verbatim with 17:6), “no king in Israel” refrain; closing thesis-equivalent statement, Section 5 #1-2 |
Coverage conclusion: All 21 chapters have been reviewed. The doctrinal and linguistic weight of the book is concentrated in chapter 2 (the core passage, supplying the cycle’s full theological vocabulary) and in the closing refrain chapters (17, 21), with chapters 3-16 contributing individual narrative instances of already-logged terms (Spirit of the LORD, judge office, vow, Nazirite) rather than new lexical categories. No chapter is silently omitted.
This analysis extends, and does not contradict, the baseline Romans Language Package. All French renderings cited here are drawn from analysis/08_core_glossary.md and assets/bible_term_registry.json and must be loaded alongside the baseline translation_memory.json before any Phase 2 translation of Judges material begins.