Psalms — Linguistic Gap Analysis (Hmong Language Package Extension)

Status: This document executes PRD Phase 1 Step 8 for the Psalms curriculum. It never contradicts the Romans Hmong Language Package Baseline v1.0 (assets/translation_memory.json, assets/bible_term_registry.json, assets/doctrine_risk_registry.json, 12_ai_translation_requirements.md) and extends it using the Psalms-specific candidate terms surfaced in analysis/08_core_glossary.md §B and assets/bible_term_registry.json (Psalms extension). Every Critical/High term inherited from Romans retains its fixed rendering unchanged. Working citation label for this book, pending formal confirmation in a future 07_citation_conventions deliverable: Nkauj Qhuas (lit. “Songs of Praise”), e.g. Nkauj Qhuas 23:1, mirroring the Romans baseline’s Loos convention.

Full-book coverage confirmation: This analysis draws on lexical evidence distributed across all 150 psalms, consistent with the chapter citations already logged in 08_core_glossary.md and the Psalms bible_term_registry.json. Chapters contributing no new gap beyond already-fenced Romans-baseline terms (e.g., Ps 13, 38, 39, 41, 56, 59, 60, 64, 76, 87, 93, 99, 101, 108, 113-114, 120, 123-129, 131, 133-134, 142, 148, 150 in their non-cited portions) are logged here as reviewed — no new linguistic gap beyond items already catalogued in §1–§4 below.

---

1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

For each of the eight assigned Psalms doctrines: the available destination-language terms (TM-inherited or Section-B candidate), their specific weaknesses, and the recommended fencing/teaching strategy.

1.1 The Character of God as Shepherd, King, and Refuge

Available Hmong terms	Source	Weakness	Recommended strategy
tus Yug Yaj (Shepherd)	registry #11	Comprehension gap only — sheep-herding is not a dominant Hmong highland agrarian practice; no traditional-religion collision	Reuse existing Hmong-Christian John-10 rendering; add illustrative note bridging to a locally familiar herding/livestock-tending image (e.g., cattle/buffalo tending) without replacing the fixed lexeme
pob zeb / chaw ruaj khov / chaw nkaum (Rock/Fortress/Refuge)	registry #17	Crowded neighborhood: overlaps with Hmong protective-charm/amulet practice (khawv koob) worn to ward off harm	Mandatory grammatical anchoring to God as Person at every occurrence (never a free-floating protective object); never juxtapose with khawv koob vocabulary even contrastively without a teaching note
Vajtswv uas muaj hwjchim loj kawg nkaus (Shaddai/Almighty)	registry #6, extends Romans TM hwjchim rule	Bare hwjchim forbidden — identical to shamanic ritual power	Full qualifying phrase mandatory at every occurrence, no exception, per Romans TM registry #62
tus zov ntsoov (Keeper)	registry #18	Crowded neighborhood: overlaps with household guardian-spirit concepts	Explicit “personal, wakeful, covenant God” framing required each time; never left as a generic guardian metaphor
pas nrig / pas fai (rod/staff, pastoral) cross-referenced to pas kav tebchaws (royal scepter)	registry #15	Single Hebrew lexeme shebet binds Shepherd doctrine to Kingship doctrine; two unrelated Hmong words risk severing that link	Mandatory cross-reference note at every occurrence linking Ps 23:4 to Ps 2:9 / 110:2

Recommended overarching strategy: Every refuge/protection image in this doctrine must carry an explicit, non-negotiable “trust in a Person, not a protective object or spirit-guardian” anchor. This is the single most repeated fencing requirement in the Psalter and should be treated as a structural rule, not a per-verse judgment call.

1.2 Lament and Honest Prayer

Available Hmong terms	Source	Weakness	Recommended strategy
(no fixed lexeme — genre-level teaching category)	registry #33	Comprehension/genre gap: Hmong customary practice toward spirits/ancestors favors ritual placation and avoidance of direct verbal complaint, not honest confrontational address	Teach as a positive doctrinal contrast (sanctioned honest speech to a personal, relational God), not a collision requiring resolution
tso kuv tseg (forsaken, Ps 22:1)	registry #34	Risk of implying an actual Trinitarian rupture rather than the Son bearing judicial wrath	Must be taught alongside Trinitarian doctrine and cross-referenced to the Romans TM wrath_of_god entry (Critical collision management already established)
kev thov Vajtswv txiav txim rau tus yeeb ncuab (imprecatory prayer)	registry #35	Crowded neighborhood: risk of syncretistic blending with pre-existing Hmong curse/counter-curse ritual appeals to spirits for retribution	Mandatory “entrusting vengeance to God’s justice, never personal cursing” framing at every occurrence; raw grief must not be softened, but the entrusting-frame must never be omitted
muab kuv ntsuj plig cob rau koj (Ps 31:5)	registry #38	Anthropological ntsuj plig, never Vaj Ntsuj Plig — heightened stakes because Christ quotes this verse at the cross	Zero-tolerance prefix discipline; flag for mandatory theologian review at every touchpoint

1.3 Praise and Worship

Available Hmong terms	Source	Weakness	Recommended strategy
pehawm / pab teev (worship, object mandatory)	registry #39, inherits Romans TM registry #71	Crowded neighborhood — identical verb to pehawm dab (ancestor/spirit veneration)	Object always stated (pehawm Vajtswv); explicit replacement-not-addition teaching for converts, reused verbatim from Romans baseline
dab mlom (idol)	registry #43, inherits Romans TM registry #32	Correct-as-is but must not be softened to “statue”	Reuse exactly; cross-reference to pehawm Vajtswv vs. pehawm dab contrast when teaching Ps 115/135
raj xyu / nkauj nog ncas / nruas / kev seev cev (instrument cluster)	registry #41	Comprehension gap (ancient instruments unfamiliar in specific form)	Illustrative bridging note to Hmong qeej/drum/gong musical culture, parallel to Romans baseline’s olive-tree bridging convention
Haleluyas	registry #42	None — stable transliterated loanword	Reuse exactly; no paraphrase needed

1.4 Messianic Prophecy in the Psalms

Available Hmong terms	Source	Weakness	Recommended strategy
tus Mexiyas (Messiah)	registry #8	Crowded neighborhood risk if diminished: could be flattened to generic “king”	Mandatory footnote cross-referencing Yexus Khetos at first occurrence (Ps 2:2); never reduced to a purely political ruler
Leej Tub (Ps 2:7 coronation formula)	registry #9	Critical dual-reading risk: original adoptive-Davidic sense vs. Christ’s eternal ontological Sonship	Mandatory two-layer teaching note distinguishing typological original setting from NT fulfillment; never let either layer stand alone
Vajtswv, koj lub zwm txwv nyob mus ib txhis (Ps 45:6/Heb 1:8)	registry #47	Direct address of “Elohim” to the king — risk of softening to merely honorific “godlike” ruler	Preserve direct address without softening; mandatory theologian cross-reference to Romans TM son_of_god full-deity entry
tus dawb huv ntawm Vajtswv (Holy One, Ps 16:10)	registry #44	Crowded neighborhood: overlaps with ordinary sanctification vocabulary (dawb huv)	Explicit messianic-resurrection framing (Acts 2:25-28) required at every occurrence to prevent flattening into generic personal-holiness teaching
qhov ntxa / lub chaw ntawm cov tuag (Sheol)	registry #45	Critical collision: Hmong ancestor-realm cosmology assumes ongoing interactive presence of the dead	See §3 below — dedicated fencing required
pob zeb uas cov tsim tsev tsis txais... (rejected cornerstone)	registry #46	Heavier Messianic-typology weight than the general stumbling-block entry	Dedicated teaching note (Matt 21:42, Acts 4:11, 1 Pet 2:7), not folded silently into the Romans TM stumbling_block entry
tus Tswv ... tus Tswv (Ps 110:1 two-Person address)	registry #10	Hmong lacks a lexical slot distinguishing YHWH from “my lord/master”	Mandatory disambiguating teaching note at every touchpoint; escalate to theologian per Romans-baseline precedent for dense Christological clauses

1.5 Confession and Forgiveness (Psalm 51)

Available Hmong terms	Source	Weakness	Recommended strategy
kev fav xeeb rau Vajtswv / kev txhaum uas nyob hauv lub siab / txhaum (pesha/avon/chattaah)	registry #51	Three-term Hebrew intensification collapses into one undifferentiated Hmong word if not fenced	Preserve escalating triad explicitly in any full exposition of Ps 51:1-3; cross-reference Romans TM sin_act_and_condition
tsim lub siab dawb huv tshiab (create a clean heart)	registry #54	Critical crowded neighborhood: dawb huv = ritual purity from spirit-contamination in folk practice	Paired with the Genesis creation-verb (tsim) and taught as God’s decisive re-creative act, never repeatable ritual cleansing
Vaj Ntsuj Plig (v.11) vs. ntsuj plig (v.12)	registry #55/#56	Highest-density prefix-discipline test in the Psalter — two adjacent verses, opposite referents	Zero-tolerance rule; mandatory human theologian review at every touchpoint (already logged in 08_core_glossary.md Cross-Reference Note #2)
lub siab tawg thiab txo hwjchim (broken/contrite heart)	registry #57	Possible confusion between God’s own siab (Romans TM will_of_god) and the human penitent’s broken siab	Clarify referent (human vs. divine) explicitly in every teaching instance

1.6 The Righteous and the Wicked (Psalm 1)

Available Hmong terms	Source	Weakness	Recommended strategy
tus uas nyob kaj siab lug (blessed/esher)	registry #25	Critical crowded neighborhood — natural Hmong default is koob hmoov (fate/fortune)	koob hmoov PERMANENTLY FORBIDDEN here, identical structural reasoning to Romans TM charis prohibition
tus ncaj ncees / Vajtswv txoj kev ncaj ncees	registry #26, inherits Romans TM registry #25	Ethical-descriptive sense (Ps 1, 37) vs. forensic-imputed sense (Ps 32, quoted Rom 4:7-8) must not cross-contaminate	Keep the two senses distinct at every occurrence; reserve raug suav tias ncaj ncees strictly for the forensic instances
tus limhiam (wicked/rasha)	registry #27	Crowded neighborhood — risk of conflation with Romans TM tus tsis hwm Vajtswv (ungodly/asebēs)	Keep lexically distinct: rasha = active injustice/violence; asebēs = irreverence toward God
tus ruam (fool/nabal)	registry #28	Already used generically in Romans TM merism entry (registry #22)	Distinguish willful practical God-denial (Ps 14:1, quoted Rom 3:10-12) from simple unwiseness in teaching notes
npluas nyab / quav ntsuab ya raws cua (chaff)	registry #29	Comprehension gap only	Bridge to Hmong rice-threshing imagery; no collision

1.7 Covenant Faithfulness (Hesed)

Available Hmong terms	Source	Weakness	Recommended strategy
txoj kev hlub ruaj khov raws li tej lus cog tseg (hesed)	registry #20	Highest-priority Critical term in the entire Psalms package — natural default risks koob hmoov; must also not collapse into bare kev hlub, txiaj ntsim, or unqualified txoj kev khuv leej	Same TM-revision-review-level protection as Romans charis/election/righteousness; no re-gloss permitted without formal review
kev ncaj ncees thiab kev ntseeg siab (emet, paired with hesed)	registry #21	Risk of collapsing into general-purpose qhov tseeb	Keep the fixed hendiadys pairing distinct from ordinary “truth” whenever paired with hesed (Ps 85:10, 89)
kev sib cog lus ruaj khov (berith/covenant)	registry #22	Risk of collapsing into lus cog tseg (unilateral promise, Romans TM registry #18)	Keep the fuller bilateral covenant-bond sense distinct, especially in Ps 89’s lament over apparent covenant-breaking — preserve the tension, do not resolve it by softening
txoj kev khuv leej (rachamim/eleos)	registry #23/#80	Crowded neighborhood: LXX itself flattens chesed and rachamim into one Greek word (eleos); this Hmong package must not reproduce that flattening	Reserve txoj kev khuv leej for the LXX-eleos and rachamim (womb-compassion) senses; reserve hesed’s dedicated rendering exclusively for covenant-loyalty contexts

1.8 Kingship and the Messianic King (Psalms 2 and 110)

Available Hmong terms	Source	Weakness	Recommended strategy
hnia / txo hwjchim rau Leej Tub (kiss the Son)	registry #60	Comprehension gap (unfamiliar homage gesture)	No collision; descriptive gloss sufficient
pas hlau kav tebchaws (rod of iron)	registry #61	Cross-referenced to the shebet dual-use note (#15)	No new collision beyond the already-documented Shepherd-King lexical-unity requirement
tus pov thawj (Melchizedek priesthood)	registry #48, extends Romans TM registry #12	Critical/High permanent prohibition: txiv neeb (shaman) vocabulary forbidden	Established Hmong biblical priestly term only; any drift toward shamanic-mediator vocabulary permanently forbidden
pleev roj (anoint/mashach)	registry #49	Crowded neighborhood: risk of folk-medicinal/shamanic ritual-oil association	Teach explicitly as royal-priestly consecration and covenant honor, distinguished from healing/protection oil rites
tus Tswv ... tus Tswv (Ps 110:1)	registry #10	See §1.4 above	Mandatory two-Person disambiguation note

---

2. Missing Vocabulary (No Existing Hmong Lexeme — Requires Coinage or Periphrasis)

These items have no ready-made Hmong Christian rendering and required newly-constructed periphrasis in 08_core_glossary.md/registry. They are logged here as genuine lexical gaps (not collisions) requiring TM-revision review before permanent adoption:

1. Hesed as a single covenant-loyalty concept (registry #20) — Hmong has no single word combining “loyal love” + “covenant obligation”; the constructed phrase txoj kev hlub ruaj khov raws li tej lus cog tseg is a compound coinage, not an existing idiom, and must be tested for naturalness with native speakers before finalization.
2. Berith as distinct from a simple promise (registry #22) — kev sib cog lus ruaj khov is a constructed phrase; ordinary Hmong speech does not lexically distinguish a bilateral covenant from a unilateral pledge.
3. The pesha/avon/chattaah three-term intensification (registry #51) — no Hmong equivalent triad exists; three separate periphrastic constructions were built to preserve the rhetorical escalation.
4. The elohim-plural applied to human judges (Ps 82:6) — no existing Hmong theological vocabulary addresses this construction at all; cov uas Vajtswv tsa ua tus txiav txim is an entirely new descriptive coinage requiring mandatory theologian sign-off (see §4 below).
5. Sheol as a category distinct from both Hmong Christian “hell” vocabulary and the ancestor-realm concept — qhov ntxa / lub chaw ntawm cov tuag borrows existing burial/death vocabulary but had no prior dedicated theological sense; this is a genuine gap requiring new doctrinal content, not merely a new word.
6. Rejected-cornerstone typology as distinct from generic “stumbling block” — no existing compound phrase carried the rejection-then-vindication sense; the registry #46 phrase is newly constructed.
7. The shebet cross-reference discipline itself (pastoral rod / royal scepter unity) — Hmong has separate natural words for a herding stick and a ruler’s staff of office; there is no existing single word or fixed phrase that carries both senses simultaneously, so the “missing vocabulary” here is not a word but a structural cross-referencing convention that must be manually maintained across every occurrence.

Recommended handling: All seven items above must be flagged [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: newly-coined phrase, no existing Hmong idiom] in any generated content until formally promoted through TM-revision review, per 12_ai_translation_requirements.md §2.4’s inherited rule.

---

3. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing

These are existing Hmong words/roots that must simultaneously serve multiple, theologically distinct source-text concepts, creating a high risk of unintended bleed-through between senses if not explicitly fenced at every occurrence.

Hmong root/word	Competing senses sharing it	Fencing strategy
hwjchim (power)	(a) God’s power [Romans TM #62]; (b) civil authority [Romans TM #67]; (c) Shaddai/Almighty title [registry #6]; (d) shamanic ritual power (forbidden bare use)	Mandatory qualifier at every occurrence, no bare use ever permitted, regardless of which of (a)-(c) is intended
dawb huv (holy/pure)	(a) progressive sanctification [Romans TM #46]; (b) Messianic “Holy One” typology [registry #44]; (c) “create a clean heart” re-creative act [registry #54]; (d) folk ritual purity from spirit-contamination	Each of (a)-(c) requires its own distinguishing teaching note; none may be taught as ritual cleansing (d)
ncaj ncees (righteous)	(a) forensic imputed righteousness [Romans TM #25]; (b) ethical-descriptive righteousness [Ps 1, 37]; (c) “paths of righteousness” guidance-sense [registry #13]; (d) covenant-faithfulness hendiadys with emet [registry #21]	Keep forensic (a) strictly paired with raug suav tias; keep (b)-(d) explicitly distinguished from (a) in teaching material
ntsuj plig / Vaj Ntsuj Plig	Divine Holy Spirit vs. anthropological human spirit — now tested at maximum density in Ps 51:11-12 and Ps 31:5	Zero-tolerance Vaj-prefix rule; escalate every occurrence in ch. 51 and 31 for mandatory theologian review
pehawm (worship)	(a) worship of Vajtswv; (b) pehawm dab (spirit/ancestor veneration)	Object always stated; explicit replacement-not-addition teaching
fij (offering/sacrifice) [inherited Romans concern]	(a) Christ’s atonement [Romans TM #37]; (b) ethical living-sacrifice [Romans TM #64]; (c) shamanic spirit-appeasement offerings; potentially recurs in Psalms sacrificial vocabulary (e.g. Ps 51:16-17’s contrast with sacrifice)	Continue Romans-established disambiguation; Ps 51:16-17 must be explicitly taught as reframing, not abolishing, sacrificial categories
kev hlub (love)	(a) generic warm affection [Romans TM love]; (b) hesed’s covenant-loyal love [registry #20, requires the fuller compound]	Bare kev hlub never substituted for the fixed hesed compound
txoj kev khuv leej (mercy)	(a) LXX eleos [Romans TM #11]; (b) rachamim/womb-compassion [registry #23]; (c) risk of absorbing hesed if the fuller compound is dropped	Reserve exclusively for (a)/(b); never substitute for the dedicated hesed entry
koob hmoov (fate/fortune)	Competes for: (a) grace/charis [Romans, forbidden]; (b) esher/blessed [registry #25, forbidden]; (c) Messianic-covenant “blessing” (barak) in Ps 72:17 [registry #63, forbidden]	Permanently forbidden across all three; this is the single most heavily-fenced lexical item inherited and extended in this package
pob zeb / chaw ruaj khov / chaw nkaum (refuge imagery)	(a) God as personal refuge [registry #17]; (b) rejected-cornerstone Messianic typology [registry #46, different root sense of “stone”]; (c) Hmong protective amulet practice (khawv koob)	Explicit personal-God anchoring for (a); dedicated Messianic note for (b) kept separate from (a); never juxtaposed with (c)
pleev roj (anoint)	(a) royal/priestly Messianic consecration [registry #49]; (b) folk-medicinal/shamanic ritual-oil use	Explicit consecration/honor framing; explicit contrast-teaching against (b)
qhov ntxa / death-realm vocabulary	(a) biblical Sheol [registry #45]; (b) Hmong ancestor-realm cosmology (ongoing interactive presence of the dead)	See §4 dedicated treatment below — this is escalated beyond ordinary fencing to full contrast-teaching
Vajtswv used in plural-adjacent constructions	(a) standard singular divine reference; (b) Ps 82:6 “ye are gods” applied to human judges	Never render Ps 82 with a plural form of Vajtswv; use the delegated-authority descriptive phrase exclusively
tus Tswv (Lord)	(a) generic Lord-title for God/Christ [Romans TM #2]; (b) Ps 110:1’s two distinct addressees within a single divine dialogue	Mandatory disambiguating teaching note whenever both referents occur in the same passage

---

4. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term	Decision	Rationale
Mexiyas (Messiah)	Transliterate (with mandatory footnote to Yexus Khetos)	Preserves direct lexical continuity to Khetos; a paraphrase (“anointed king”) would sever the OT-NT terminological bridge central to the Messianic Prophecy doctrine
Xi-oo (Zion)	Transliterate	Proper noun; no theological content requiring paraphrase, comprehension-gap only
Haleluyas	Transliterate (retain existing loanword)	Already stable in existing Hmong Christian liturgical usage; re-paraphrasing (“Praise the LORD” in full) would break the fixed liturgical exclamation’s recognizability
Abba (carried over from Romans TM)	Transliterate + gloss, per existing Romans-baseline precedent	Not newly re-decided here; reused unchanged
Hyssop (ezov)	Transliterate the botanical loanword + gloss (tsob nroj hyssop)	Parallel to the Romans baseline’s olive-tree/grafting precedent (registry #60): botanically unfamiliar, comprehension gap only, not a doctrinal collision; a native-plant substitution would falsify the ritual-historical detail without theological benefit
esher (blessed)	Paraphrase (tus uas nyob kaj siab lug), never transliterate, never use natural idiomatic koob hmoov	A transliteration would be theologically opaque and provide no teaching leverage; the natural idiomatic paraphrase (koob hmoov) is forbidden; the chosen paraphrase must be constructed, not idiomatic-default
hesed (covenant love)	Paraphrase (constructed compound), never transliterate	Transliterating a Hebrew technical term with no prior Hmong Christian exposure would be pastorally inert; a taught compound periphrasis carries the necessary teaching weight, consistent with how hilastērion was handled in the Romans baseline (paraphrase with mandatory qualifying clause, not loanword)
Sheol	Paraphrase (qhov ntxa / lub chaw ntawm cov tuag), not transliterated as a loanword	A bare transliterated “Sheol” would be doctrinally inert (unglossed) and would not trigger the necessary contrast-teaching against the ancestor-realm collision; must remain a taught descriptive phrase
Melchizedek (proper name within the priesthood formula)	Transliterate the proper name, Menkhixedes (new, logged for review), while paraphrasing the office itself (tus pov thawj)	The proper name has no semantic content requiring paraphrase; the office term does, and must never be rendered with shamanic vocabulary
Musical instrument cluster (shofar/kinnor/nevel/toph/machol)	Paraphrase with illustrative bridging note, not transliterated	Existing Hmong musical-culture vocabulary (raj xyu, nkauj nog ncas, nruas) already supplies functional equivalents; transliterating ancient Hebrew instrument names would create unnecessary opacity where a natural bridge exists
Shaddai (Almighty)	Paraphrase with mandatory qualifier, not transliterated	Consistent with the Romans baseline’s treatment of divine titles requiring the hwjchim qualifier; a transliterated “Shadai” would evade rather than resolve the power-vocabulary collision

General rule surfaced by this review: transliteration is reserved for (a) proper nouns with no semantic doctrinal content (Zion, Melchizedek), (b) already-stable prior Hmong Christian loanwords (Haleluyas, Abba), and (c) botanical/cultural items where the specific historical detail matters more than comprehension ease (hyssop). Everywhere a term carries doctrinal weight requiring active contrast-teaching against a traditional-religion collision (esher, hesed, Sheol, Shaddai), paraphrase with a constructed, teachable phrase is required instead — mirroring the Romans baseline’s identical decision for hilastērion and Txoj Kevcai.

---

5. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × collision specificity × occurrence density), extending the Romans baseline’s Critical/High tiers to this curriculum’s core passage and eight doctrines.

1. Hesed (txoj kev hlub ruaj khov raws li tej lus cog tseg) vs. koob hmoov — Critical. The single highest-density relational term in the Psalter (Ps 23:6 alone anchors the core passage); identical structural collision to Romans’ charis/koob hmoov prohibition, but with far higher occurrence density across the whole book. Doctrine: Covenant Faithfulness.
2. Vaj Ntsuj Plig vs. ntsuj plig at Ps 51:11-12 — Critical. Highest-density adjacent-verse prefix-discipline test in the entire curriculum; a single dropped prefix inverts the doctrine within two consecutive lines. Doctrine: Confession and Forgiveness.
3. esher/blessed vs. koob hmoov — Critical. Opens Psalm 1 and recurs as the Psalter’s most repeated structural refrain; default idiomatic Hmong usage is the forbidden term. Doctrine: The Righteous and the Wicked.
4. Sheol vs. Hmong ancestor-realm cosmology — Critical. Unlike the Romans baseline’s collision terms (which involve ritual practice or fate), this collision involves an entire competing cosmological framework about the ongoing status and influence of the dead; risk of complete doctrinal inversion (interactive ancestor presence vs. non-interactive shadowy realm awaiting resurrection hope) if unaddressed. Doctrine: Messianic Prophecy (Ps 16), general anthropology.
5. “Create a clean heart” (tsim lub siab dawb huv tshiab) vs. ritual purification — Critical. Compounds two already-flagged Romans collisions (dawb huv ritual-purity risk plus the Genesis creation-verb’s re-creative force) into a single clause at the theological center of the core-adjacent confession psalm. Doctrine: Confession and Forgiveness.
6. Ps 82:6 “ye are gods” vs. Hmong spirit-populated cosmology — Critical. Unique risk of appearing to endorse literal polytheism or ruler-deification in a culture with many named spiritual beings; requires an entirely new descriptive construction with no prior TM precedent. Doctrine: Character of God (cross-cutting into Kingship).
7. Refuge/Rock imagery vs. khawv koob protective amulets — High. Extremely high occurrence density (9+ psalms) of a metaphor that, unanchored, defaults toward a competing protective-object ritual practice rather than personal trust in God. Doctrine: Character of God as Shepherd, King, and Refuge.
8. Ps 2:7/Ps 89 “Thou art my Son” adoptive-vs-ontological Sonship — High/Critical boundary. Risk of either diminishing Christ’s eternal deity (reading only the adoptive Davidic layer) or losing the OT-NT typological continuity (reading only the NT layer back into the original without explanation). Doctrine: Kingship and the Messianic King.
9. Imprecatory prayer vs. Hmong curse/counter-curse ritual appeal — High. Broad occurrence (7 psalms) with genuine risk of syncretistic blending if the “entrusting vengeance to God” frame is dropped even once. Doctrine: Lament and Honest Prayer.
10. rasha (tus limhiam) vs. asebēs (tus tsis hwm Vajtswv) — Medium-High. Not a traditional-religion collision but a doctrinally significant internal flattening risk between two Romans-Psalms terms that must stay distinct for the Righteous/Wicked doctrine’s ethical-legal texture to survive. Doctrine: The Righteous and the Wicked.
11. Ps 110:1 two-Person tus Tswv address — High. Hmong’s lack of a lexical slot paralleling the Hebrew’s YHWH/adoni distinction risks collapsing the very two-Person structure the NT’s deity-of-Christ argument (Matt 22:41-45) depends upon. Doctrine: Messianic Prophecy / Kingship.
12. Ps 45:6/Heb 1:8 direct “Elohim” address to the king — High. Risk of softening full deity-of-Christ language to a merely honorific “godlike ruler” framing under comprehension pressure. Doctrine: Messianic Prophecy.

Escalation note: Items 1-6 above touch Critical-tier doctrines and require mandatory human theologian review with no automated-review bypass, per the Romans-baseline routing rule inherited unchanged (assets/doctrine_risk_registry.json §review_routing_rule). Items 7-12 require human theologian review as High-tier collision-specific risks, not merely native-speaker comprehension review.

---

6. Governing Note

This gap analysis extends, and never contradicts, the Romans Hmong Language Package Baseline v1.0. All Section-B/registry candidate terms referenced above remain provisional TM candidates pending formal TM-revision review and human theologian sign-off before promotion to permanent status, per 12_ai_translation_requirements.md §2.4 and §10’s governing note. No Critical/High-risk term inherited from the Romans baseline (Vajtswv, tus Tswv, Vaj Ntsuj Plig, ntsuj plig, txiaj ntsim, hwjchim, kev cawm dim, kev xaiv, Txoj Kevcai, raug suav tias ncaj ncees, pehawm, dab mlom, kev cai raus dej, kev raug ua kom dawb huv) has been altered by this analysis; all extensions documented here are additive.