06 — Linguistic Gap Analysis: Lamentations (German)

Curriculum: Lamentations Core passage: Lamentations 3:19–26 Destination language: German Depends on: 08_core_glossary.md, bible_term_registry.json (Lamentations additions), baseline Romans/Gospels translation_memory.json and bible_term_registry.json Purpose: Identify where German has no adequate word (missing vocabulary), where German has too many overlapping words competing for the same semantic space (crowded neighborhoods), where a term should be transliterated rather than translated, and rank the highest-risk ambiguities for Phase 2 escalation routing.

---

1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

For each of the five curriculum doctrines: the German terms available, their specific weaknesses for this content, and the recommended handling strategy.

1.1 Honest Grief and Lament before God

Available German terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
Klage	Correct genre word (funeral dirge / complaint), but contemporary secular usage skews toward legal complaint (eine Klage einreichen) or mundane grumbling (sich beklagen), risking trivialization of Lamentations’ totalizing grief.	Adopt as the fixed doctrine-level term ([NEW], already assigned in glossary #41). Gloss on first teaching use as “das laute, ungeschönte Klagen vor Gott” to block the legal/petty-complaint readings.
Trauer / Trauerarbeit	”Trauerarbeit” (grief-work) is a modern psychological-therapeutic term (Freud-derived) that risks reframing biblical lament as a private psychological process rather than covenantal speech addressed to God.	Avoid as primary rendering of the genre; may be used descriptively in teaching commentary but never as a translation of qinah itself.
Elend / Leid (#1)	Adequate for concrete affliction but does not carry the address-to-God dimension central to lament as genre.	Retain for the content of suffering (oni), keep distinct from Klage the speech-act/genre term.
weinen / bitterlich weinen (#19)	Standard, low risk, but flattens Hebrew’s intensifying infinitive-absolute construction if rendered with a single plain verb.	Always intensify: “sie weint und weint” / “bitterlich weinen” rather than a single unmarked verb.
Tröster (absence of, #20)	Crowded neighborhood — collides with the already-fixed baseline rendering of ho paraklētos (Holy Spirit, John 14–16).	Use exactly as baseline requires (no substitute exists), but mandatory teaching gloss every occurrence: Lamentations 1 laments the absence of a comforter that the NT later names and answers as a permanent divine gift. Never let the word stand unglossed.

Gap identified: German lacks a single word that captures “extended, unresolved, God-directed complaint that is neither despair nor resignation.” Klage is the best available anchor but requires constant reinforcement against its secular-legal and psychologizing neighbors. Strategy: fence Klage as a technical doctrine term with a standing teaching gloss, reused identically across all five chapters.

1.2 God’s Faithfulness amid Judgment (“Great Is Your Faithfulness”)

Available German terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
Treue (emunah, #12)	The best available word, but German speakers may hear “Treue” primarily as relational fidelity between humans (marital, friendship) rather than God’s own metaphysical reliability/steadfastness (same root as “Amen”). Risk of collapsing into human-faith side of the equation if paired carelessly with Glaube.	Fix as the required rendering (already CRITICAL in registry). Mandatory teaching note distinguishing Treue (God’s reliability, the ground of hope) from Glaube (human believing, the baseline’s Romans term) — the doctrine title itself depends on this distinction holding. Cross-check against the German hymn “Groß ist deine Treue, Herr” for teaching-context consistency.
Gnade / Güte (chesed, #9)	Crowded neighborhood, CRITICAL — identical German word already fixed for χάρις (baseline “grace,” forensic/unmerited/justifying). OT chesed is covenant loyalty sustained toward a people already in relationship, often amid deserved judgment — overlapping but not identical theological content. Luther’s own famous rendering of Lamentations 3:22 (“Die Gnade des HERRN ist’s, dass wir nicht gar aus sind”) makes the collision nearly unavoidable and liturgically entrenched.	Retain “Gnade” (cannot realistically displace Luther’s own rendering) but require a mandatory theologian-authored framing note at every occurrence distinguishing “covenant-sustaining Gnade” (Lamentations) from “justifying, once-for-all Gnade” (Romans). Never let the two be silently merged as though one word = one identical doctrine.
Barmherzigkeit (rachamim, #10)	Previously listed in the Romans package as a rejected alternative for χάρις — reviewers may wrongly assume it is blanket-forbidden.	Explicitly note in Phase 2 materials: the earlier rejection was specific to the χάρις entry; here it is the correct primary term. No substitute is needed.
Rettung (teshuah, #18)	Reused exactly from baseline (σωτηρία). Risk is the reverse of usual: over-spiritualizing a concrete historical referent (end of siege/exile) into only its NT sense too quickly.	Teach the concrete historical referent first, then draw the NT continuity explicitly — a genuine asset rather than a risk if sequenced correctly.

Gap identified: No German word cleanly separates “God’s covenant-sustaining loyal love” from “God’s justifying forensic grace” — both default to Gnade. This is the single largest doctrinal fencing challenge in the whole curriculum. Strategy: cannot solve lexically; must solve through mandatory paired glossing at every occurrence of chesed.

1.3 The Justice of God’s Discipline

Available German terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
gerecht / Gerechtigkeit (tsaddiq, #21)	Crowded neighborhood, CRITICAL — same word-family already fixed CRITICAL in the Romans baseline for forensic, faith-received righteousness (Luther’s Turmerlebnis term). Here the sense is covenant-lawsuit judicial vindication: God is righteous as judge pronouncing a verdict against confessed covenant rebellion, not righteousness credited to a believer by faith.	Retain “gerecht” (no viable substitute exists in the established Bible-German register) but require explicit theologian framing distinguishing “God as vindicated righteous judge” (Lamentations 1:18) from “righteousness imputed to the believer by faith” (Romans 1:17, 4:3) — related facets of one divine attribute, not interchangeable doctrines.
Zorn (Gottes) (#25)	CRITICAL, highest German-specific sensitivity in the book. Divine-wrath-against-Jerusalem language has documented history of supersessionist misuse (exile as “proof” of ongoing collective guilt) and of nationalist theological misappropriation in 20th-century German contexts. Directly parallels the baseline’s Matthew 23 / Matthew 27:25 mandatory-framing precedent.	Mandatory theologian-authored anti-misuse framing at every occurrence (chs. 2, 3, 5), establishing: (1) this is Judah’s own prophetically-warned, self-confessed covenant discipline (1:18; 3:42), not externally imposed collective punishment; (2) never extended to claims about ongoing guilt or divine rejection of the Jewish people; (3) held in structural tension with steadfast love (ch. 3), never resolved into caprice. No lexical substitute solves this; it is a framing requirement, not a translation problem.
Vergeltung (gemul, #34)	CRITICAL — the imprecatory prayer (3:64–66) sits directly after the core passage’s hope (3:19–26) and risks being excised in teaching for being “unpleasant,” or conversely being read as license for personal vengeance if left unframed.	Mandatory theologian framing: this is prayer entrusting judgment to God (consistent with “quiet waiting,” 3:26), never a model for personal retaliation. Must be taught together with, not apart from, 3:19–26.
Tag seines Zorns (#26)	Distinct historical referent (586 BC) but shares vocabulary with the prophetic-eschatological “Day of the LORD” motif German teaching material elsewhere associates with final judgment.	Signpost explicitly: historically specific day, typologically related to but not identical with final eschatological judgment. Do not collapse without signposting.
Schuld / Verschulden (avon, #33)	Deliberately ambiguous in the Hebrew (4:22: “your guilt is completed” / “your punishment is completed”) between the sin itself and its consequence. German “Schuld” happens to carry the same dual sense (moral guilt / financial-legal debt), which is a genuine asset here.	Preserve the ambiguity deliberately; do not resolve one-sidedly in translation or teaching notes.

Gap identified: German’s normal vocabulary for divine judgment is not lexically deficient (Zorn, gerecht, Vergeltung are all serviceable) — the gap is entirely in historical-sensitivity framing capacity, which no word choice can supply. Strategy: treat this doctrine as requiring mandatory theologian-authored contextual apparatus attached to the text, not a vocabulary substitution.

1.4 Hope Anchored in God’s Steadfast Love

Available German terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
hoffen (yachal, #8)	HIGH risk — ordinary German “hoffen” is casual and uncertain (“ich hoffe, dass…” = “I hope, but might be wrong”), the opposite valence of yachal’s confident, patient, character-grounded expectation. This is the weakest single lexical match in the entire core passage.	No better single word exists. Strategy: pair “hoffen” consistently with an intensifying qualifier in teaching material (“zuversichtlich hoffen,” “beharrlich hoffen”) and always anchor it explicitly to God’s Treue (emunah) as its ground, so the confidence is imported from context rather than expected from the verb alone.
harren / warten auf (qavah, #15)	“Warten” alone is neutral/passive (waiting for a bus). “Harren” is more literary/dated but preserves the tensed, active-expectancy image (root: a stretched cord) better than plain “warten.”	Prefer “harren” or “beharrlich warten auf” over bare “warten” wherever the theological weight of confident expectancy is load-bearing (3:24–25).
still / in Stille (dumam, #17)	Risk of being read as stoic emotional suppression, especially against a German cultural backdrop that can valorize composed self-control.	Teach explicitly as trust-filled restraint that follows the honest lament already voiced (not a replacement for it) and sits alongside the imprecatory prayer of 3:64–66 — i.e., stillness is not indifference to injustice.
mein Anteil (cheleq, #13)	“Erbe” (inheritance) was considered and rejected as primary, since it would prematurely collapse the OT land-portion image into NT Kindschaft/inheritance theology (Romans 8, Ephesians 1). “Anteil” is accurate but low-resonance/flat in contemporary German.	Retain “mein Anteil” as primary; may note the NT inheritance connection explicitly in teaching commentary as a typological bridge, not build it into the word choice itself.
Treue / Gnade / Güte	See §1.2 above — same CRITICAL collision terms anchor this doctrine too.	Same mandatory framing applies; this doctrine and §1.2 share their highest-risk vocabulary.

Gap identified: The confident-expectancy sense of yachal/qavah has no single strong German equivalent; German’s hope-vocabulary defaults to tentative register. Strategy: compensate through consistent intensifying modifiers and explicit contextual anchoring to Treue, rather than seeking a nonexistent perfect lexical match.

1.5 Corporate Confession of Sin

Available German terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
Sündenbekenntnis / Schuldbekenntnis (#40, NEW)	No single fixed German liturgical term maps precisely onto the composite “we have sinned / our fathers sinned, we bear it” pattern spanning chs. 3 and 5; German confessional liturgy (Beichte, Sündenbekenntnis in the Allgemeines Schuldbekenntnis of the liturgy) supplies a partial ready-made register.	Adopt “Sündenbekenntnis/Schuldbekenntnis” as the fixed doctrine-level term; may draw a constructive, explicitly-signposted link to the liturgical Allgemeines Schuldbekenntnis familiar to German Protestant and Catholic worshippers, without implying Lamentations 5 is that liturgical form.
umkehren (shuv, #31)	HIGH risk, crowded neighborhood — collides conceptually (not lexically) with baseline “Buße” (μετάνοια), already flagged High risk for its own Reformation-era sacramental-vs-internal dispute. Shuv is a spatial-relational covenant image (“turning back along the path”); metanoia is cognitive (“change of mind”).	Keep “umkehren” and “Buße” lexically and conceptually distinct in all teaching material; present as complementary facets of repentance, not synonyms, so the Reformation-era Buße debate is not imported wholesale into Lamentations’ distinct covenantal image.
sich auflehnen / abfallen (pasha/marah, #32)	Standard theological vocabulary; low collision risk beyond general care.	Use as part of the confession word-family alongside Schuld (#33) and Sünde (#37); no special fencing required.
Sünde (chata, #37)	HIGH risk — reused exactly from baseline. The corporate/intergenerational framing of 5:7 (“our fathers sinned… we bear their iniquities”) risks either (a) fatalistic blame-transfer that excuses the present generation, or (b) an over-individualized German reading that misses the corporate “we” entirely.	Teach 5:7 always paired with 5:16 and 5:21 (the community’s own present confession and plea), never in isolation, to block both fatalism and individualization.
erneuern (chadesh, #39)	Low lexical risk; the loss is structural, not lexical — German cannot preserve the Hebrew wordplay in which the same root (shuv) used for human “return” in 3:40 is turned back on God as a plea for God’s own restoring initiative in 5:21.	Surface the wordplay explicitly in teaching commentary since German vocabulary cannot reproduce it formally; note “umkehren” (3:40, human) and the implicit divine-turning sense behind 5:21’s plea as a deliberate two-way theological inversion.

Gap identified: German has adequate individual vocabulary for confession, sin, and repentance, but no single term spans the corporate “we”-confession structure; the risk is entirely in sequencing/teaching (avoiding fatalism or individualization), not in word availability. Strategy: doctrine-level composite term (#40) plus mandatory cross-referencing across 3:42, 5:7, 5:16, 5:21.

---

2. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

2.1 Missing Vocabulary (German lacks an adequate word; must compensate structurally)

Concept	Gap	Compensation strategy
Confident, patient, character-grounded expectation (yachal/qavah)	German “hoffen”/“warten” defaults to tentative or neutral registers; no word carries built-in confidence.	Consistent intensifying modifiers + explicit anchoring to God’s Treue in every teaching occurrence.
Holistic self (nephesh)	German “Seele” imports post-Cartesian/Hellenistic body-soul dualism absent from Hebrew thought.	Standing gloss: “das ganze Ich,” teach nephesh as whole-person life/appetite, not a detachable immaterial part.
Hebrew wordplay on shuv (human “return” ↔ implicit divine “return” in restoration plea, 3:40/5:21)	No German root spans both senses the way Hebrew shuv does.	Explicit teaching-note surfacing of the wordplay; cannot be reproduced in the translated text itself.
Qeren as strength-idiom (animal horn = might)	Not an active German metaphor; a literal “Horn” reads as a musical instrument or literal animal horn to contemporary readers.	Brief cultural-linguistic footnote required at first occurrence (2:3).
A German literary register for extended, unresolved, addressed-to-God complaint (qinah as genre)	Nearest word (“Klage”) is crowded with secular legal/complaint senses; no dedicated devotional-literary equivalent survives in everyday German the way it may in liturgical Hebrew or even English “lament” (via Psalter-based devotional tradition).	Fix “Klage” as technical term with standing gloss; consider supplementary teaching vocabulary (“Klagegebet,” “Klagelied”) to reinforce the prayer-address dimension in extended teaching material.

2.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (too many German words compete, or one German word is claimed by multiple source concepts) — require fencing

German word/family	Competing source concepts	Fencing requirement
Gnade	chesed (OT covenant loyalty, Lamentations) vs. χάρις (NT forensic justifying grace, Romans baseline)	Mandatory paired framing note at every chesed occurrence; never let one gloss stand for both without the distinction stated.
gerecht/Gerechtigkeit	tsaddiq (covenant-lawsuit judicial vindication, Lamentations 1:18) vs. δικαιοσύνη (imputed righteousness by faith, Romans baseline CRITICAL)	Theologian framing distinguishing “God vindicated as righteous judge” from “righteousness credited to the believer” — related facet, not identical doctrine.
Tröster	menachem (absent human/political comforter, Lamentations 1) vs. ὁ παράκλητος (Holy Spirit, John 14–16 baseline)	Mandatory gloss at every Lamentations occurrence: this names an absence the NT title later answers; never merge as if Lamentations already names the Paraclete.
Buße / umkehren	metanoia (cognitive change of mind, baseline Matthew/Mark) vs. shuv (spatial-relational covenant turning, Lamentations 3:40, 5:21)	Keep lexically distinct; teach as complementary facets of repentance, not synonyms — avoid importing the Reformation sacramental-Buße dispute wholesale into Lamentations’ image.
verlassen	Christ’s cry of dereliction (Mark 15:34/Ps 22:1, baseline fixed) vs. Lamentations 5:20’s closing “why do you forsake us”	Constructive collision — surface deliberately as continuity of lament tradition fulfilled in Christ, not left as unremarked coincidence.
Kelch	Gethsemane/Eucharistic cup (baseline fixed) vs. kos, the cup of wrath passed among nations (Lamentations 4:21)	Constructive collision — same treatment as above; teach the intertextual link explicitly (Christ drinking the very cup of wrath depicted here).
Sünde	General baseline “sin” (Romans/Galatians package) vs. the corporate/intergenerational chata of 5:7	No lexical fencing needed, but sequencing fence required (see §1.5) against fatalism/individualization.
Barmherzigkeit	rachamim (correct primary term here) vs. its status as a rejected alternative for χάρις in the Romans baseline	Clarify explicitly in Phase 2 notes that the earlier rejection is entry-specific and does not apply to this distinct Hebrew term — a documentation fence, not a lexical one.

Observation: Lamentations produces an unusually high concentration of crowded-neighborhood collisions with the existing Romans/Gospels baseline specifically because both corpora share core covenantal vocabulary (Gnade, gerecht, Tröster, Buße, verlassen, Kelch, Sünde). Three of these collisions (Tröster, verlassen, Kelch) are constructive — genuine intertextual bridges worth teaching deliberately. Two (Gnade, gerecht) are dangerous — near-identical vocabulary masking materially different doctrinal content that must be actively fenced apart at every occurrence, not merely footnoted once.

---

3. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term	Decision	Rationale
Abba, Halleluja, Amen (baseline-inherited forms, not primary to Lamentations but present in the wider curriculum’s cross-references)	Transliterate, per baseline	Established convention; not renegotiated here.
Eikhah (Hebrew book title, “How!”/“Alas!”)	Do not transliterate as the running German book title (retain standard German Bible title “Die Klagelieder [Jeremias]”/“Klagelieder”), but may introduce the transliteration “Eicha” once in introductory teaching material to explain the Hebrew title’s exclamatory force (“Ach, wie…!”), which the German title “Klagelieder” does not itself convey.	Paraphrase (translated title) for ongoing use; transliteration permitted only as a one-time etymological teaching note.
qinah (funeral-dirge genre term)	Paraphrase as “Klage”/“Klagelied,” do not transliterate	No teaching value in the bare transliteration for a general German audience; the genre concept, not the Hebrew word itself, is what must be taught.
chesed, emunah, nephesh, lev, yachal, qavah (technical Hebrew terms discussed in the glossary)	Paraphrase into German (Gnade/Güte, Treue, Seele, Herz, hoffen, harren) for the translated text itself; retain the Hebrew transliteration in parentheses in teacher-facing/theologian-review material only, never in the reader-facing translated text	These are common nouns in continuous poetic text, not proper nouns or liturgical set-phrases; transliterating them into the Bible text itself would break register and readability for the target audience (cf. baseline’s “Avoid untranslated Latin theological tags unless immediately glossed” principle, extended here to Hebrew).
Zion / Tochter Zion	Transliterate/retain as established German Bible proper noun (“Zion”), not paraphrase (e.g., not “die Stadt” or “Jerusalem” as a substitute)	Zion is a fixed, recognizable proper name in German Bible tradition; paraphrasing it away would lose the personification device central to the book’s poetry. Requires accompanying teaching gloss (see §1, crowded-neighborhood note) rather than a translation substitute.
meshiach YHWH (“the LORD’s anointed”)	Paraphrase as “der Gesalbte des HERRN,” do not render as “der Messias”	Preserves the historical-king referent (4:20) while leaving the typological link to “Messias” (baseline term) to be drawn explicitly in teaching, not built into the word choice itself, avoiding a false direct-prophecy reading.
gever (“the man,” 3:1)	Paraphrase as “der Mann,” retain the definite article’s representative-individual force	No transliteration value; the literary function (representative sufferer bridging to ch. 5’s “we”) is conveyed through consistent phrasing and teaching notes, not through the Hebrew word.

General principle for this curriculum: Transliterate only established proper nouns and liturgical set-phrases already fixed by German Bible tradition (Zion, Amen, Halleluja, Abba). Paraphrase all common-noun theological vocabulary into German, compensating for lost nuance through mandatory glosses and teacher-facing Hebrew cross-references rather than through transliteration in the reader-facing text — consistent with the baseline’s existing discipline against untranslated Latin tags.

---

4. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities

Ranked by combined severity of (a) doctrinal distortion potential, (b) collision with existing fixed baseline vocabulary, and (c) German-specific historical/cultural sensitivity.

1. chesed → “Gnade/Güte” colliding with baseline χάρις “Gnade” (§1.2). Highest risk in the entire curriculum: the exact same German word is required by Luther’s own entrenched liturgical rendering for two theologically distinct concepts (covenant-sustaining loyalty vs. forensic justifying grace). No lexical fix is possible; only mandatory, occurrence-by-occurrence theologian framing prevents silent doctrinal merger. Directly load-bearing for the doctrine “God’s Faithfulness amid Judgment.”

2. Zorn (Gottes) — divine wrath language with documented German misuse history (§1.3). Not a translation-accuracy risk but a historical-weaponization risk of the same class as the baseline’s Matthew 23/27:25 rule. Requires mandatory theologian-authored anti-misuse framing at every occurrence across three chapters (2, 3, 5), establishing the judgment as self-confessed, non-collective-guilt, non-eternal covenant discipline.

3. tsaddiq/gerecht — covenant-lawsuit judicial righteousness colliding with baseline forensic-imputed righteousness (§1.3). Same word-family as the Romans package’s single most historically load-bearing German theological term (Luther’s Turmerlebnis). Risk of readers assuming Lamentations 1:18 and Romans 1:17 name the identical doctrine when they name related but distinct facets.

4. emunah/Treue vs. baseline Glaube — risk of relocating the ground of hope from God’s character to human faith-exercise (§1.2, §1.4). If “Treue” and “Glaube” are taught loosely as near-synonyms, the doctrine “Hope Anchored in God’s Steadfast Love” is subtly undermined at its root — hope would appear grounded in the sufferer’s believing rather than in God’s own reliability.

5. yachal/qavah → “hoffen”/“harren” — register mismatch between tentative German “hoping” and confident Hebrew expectant waiting (§1.4). The hinge-term of the core passage (3:21, 24) is at structural risk of sounding weaker in German than in the source, precisely at the passage’s theological turning point.

6. Vergeltung (gemul) — imprecatory prayer immediately following the core passage’s hope (§1.3). Risk of pastoral excision (teaching only 3:19–26 and silently dropping 3:64–66) or of misreading as license for personal vengeance if taught in isolation. Both failure modes are plausible without explicit intervention.

7. Zion/Tochter Zion — contemporary political-Zionism association (glossary #22; §3). Lower doctrinal-distortion risk than items 1–6 (the ancient referent is not truly ambiguous in the text itself) but high risk of audience misapplication in a German public-discourse environment where “Zion” is politically loaded; requires a standing teaching gloss at every occurrence, not a one-time footnote.

8. shuv/umkehren vs. baseline Buße/metanoia — two repentance-images blurring into one (§1.5). Risk is conceptual conflation rather than mistranslation; likely to surface in teaching material more than in the base translation itself, but left unfenced it would flatten a deliberate two-directional theological wordplay (3:40 human turning / 5:21 plea for God’s turning).

9. menachem/Tröster — absence-of-comforter colliding with the fixed Holy-Spirit title (§1.1, §2.2). Genuinely constructive if taught deliberately, but if left unglossed risks a confusing echo (readers wondering whether Lamentations 1 is already speaking of the Paraclete).

10. nephesh/Seele — imported body-soul dualism (§2.1). Lower doctrinal stakes than items 1–9 but a real risk of subtly re-Hellenizing Hebrew anthropology throughout the core passage (3:20, 24) if the standing “ganzes Ich” gloss is omitted.

---

5. Summary Recommendation for Phase 2

• Cannot be solved by word choice alone (require mandatory theologian framing notes at every occurrence): chesed/Gnade, Zorn Gottes, tsaddiq/gerecht, gemul/Vergeltung, Zion/Tochter Zion.
• Require standing teaching glosses but lower distortion risk once glossed: yachal/hoffen, qavah/harren, nephesh/Seele, menachem/Tröster, shuv/umkehren.
• Constructive collisions to surface deliberately, not merely tolerate: Tröster (absence ↔ Paraclete), Kelch (wrath ↔ Gethsemane/Eucharist), verlassen (5:20 ↔ Mark 15:34).
• Transliterate only: Zion (established proper noun); all other Hebrew technical terms are paraphrased into German with Hebrew forms retained solely in teacher-facing material.
• All findings above are already reflected in 08_core_glossary.md and the Lamentations additions to bible_term_registry.json; this document supplies the underlying gap-analysis rationale required before those artifacts’ risk tiers and review-routing assignments are finalized in Phase 1 Step 9 and enforced in Phase 2.