Log in

or use your email

Search the Library

Keyword search across Doctrine Analysis, Core Glossary, Comparative Theology, and Regional Analysis. Mention a language name for the best results — e.g. "remnant burmese" or "what glossary terms conflict for burmese."

Type at least 2 characters to search.

Welcome to the Library

What is this?

The Library publishes the doctrine-aware translation research behind tri-bible.ai, one language and book at a time — free to read and reuse.

How to navigate

Pick a language, then a book, in the sidebar. Each book has a Doctrine Analysis, a Core Glossary, and, for the language as a whole, a Comparative Theology and Regional Analysis. Use the search icon in the top nav to jump straight to a term or doctrine instead of browsing.

What the risk tiers mean

Every doctrine and glossary term is labeled with how easily it could be misread or mistranslated in that language's own cultural and religious context:

Critical
A wrong word choice here risks distorting core theology — always reviewed by a theologian before use.
High
A real, well-documented risk of confusion with another tradition or belief system — needs theologian review.
Medium
Worth a native speaker's second look, but not likely to distort the core meaning.
Low
Minor wording nuance — low risk of confusion either way.

Work with us

Tell us a bit about how you'd like to work with tri-bible.ai.

Stay informed Get our weekly newsletter. Never sold or shared, unsubscribe anytime.

Let us serve you Church leaders and ministry networks seeking translated curriculum Join our team Volunteers interested in reviewing translations
Download Translation Skill

Cross-Reference Analysis

Ruth — Cross-Reference and Theme Analysis (Hmong Language Package)

0. Methodology and Citation Normalization Convention

  • Citation format (source-language matrix key): [Book Full Name] [chapter]:[verse], e.g. Genesis 15:6, Deuteronomy 25:5, Romans 9:25, Matthew 1:5. No abbreviations in this matrix, per the PRD normalization requirement. Verse ranges use a hyphen (Genesis 38:6-30); cross-chapter ranges are cited as two references joined with a semicolon, consistent with the convention already fixed in 12_ai_translation_requirements.md §7 for Romans (Romans 8:28-39 is acceptable within one chapter; Romans 8:28; Romans 9:1 for cross-chapter spans).
  • Ruth’s own citations use the book name Ruth in this matrix (English-key column) and the proposed destination form Rus [chapter]:[verse] (per 07_semantic_analysis.md §0, still pending final confirmation — see flag below).
  • Romans citations use the already-ratified destination form Loos [chapter]:[verse] per the baseline package.
  • Other OT/NT books’ Hmong citation forms (Genesis, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Hosea, Ezekiel, Matthew, Luke, John, Galatians, Ephesians, Titus, 1 Peter) are not yet ratified in any Hmong Language Package produced by this pipeline. [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: confirm standard Hmong book-name abbreviations for all cross-referenced OT/NT books against the existing Vaj Lug Kub Npaiv Npaum (HWB) tradition before Phase 2 publication]. Until confirmed, this matrix cites all non-Ruth/non-Romans references only in the English-key normalized form.
  • Risk-tier and doctrine-risk conventions (Critical/High/Medium/Low) are inherited unchanged from assets/bible_term_registry.json and assets/doctrine_risk_registry.json. Every row below that touches a Critical or High risk term/doctrine is marked in the Translation Sensitivity column and requires the same human-theologian pre-publication review routing already established for Romans.
  • Scope discipline: every chapter of Ruth (1-4) is covered below; every explicit OT legal/narrative allusion identifiable in the text, every Messianic/typological forward link, and every point of contact with the Romans Language Package’s fixed terminology is logged. No chapter is silently skipped.

1. Cross-Reference Matrix — Ruth Chapter 1

Ruth PassageThemeRelated Character(s)OT/NT ConnectionTranslation Sensitivity
Ruth 1:1Providence in famine; settingElimelech, NaomiGenesis 12:10 (Abram’s famine-to-Egypt); Genesis 26:1 (Isaac’s famine); Genesis 41:53-57; Genesis 47:13 (Joseph’s famine); Judges 2:16-19 (Judges-era moral/covenant chaos backdrop)Low — descriptive scene-setting; no traditional-religion collision. Reinforces Doctrine 3 (Providence): famine repeatedly the occasion for God’s larger redemptive move in the patriarchal narratives, now recurring in Ruth.
Ruth 1:4Gentile marriage / Moabite stigmaMahlon, Chilion, Ruth, OrpahDeuteronomy 23:3-6 (Moabites/Ammonites excluded from the assembly of the LORD); Numbers 25:1-3 (Moabite cultic entanglement at Baal-Peor); Genesis 19:36-37 (Moab’s origin from Lot’s daughter)High — background law/history essential for teaching how radical Ruth’s inclusion (Doctrine 4) is; must not be omitted or the force of 1:16-17 and 4:13-17 is lost. Requires a dedicated teaching note, not a lexical fix.
Ruth 1:8Hesed / covenant loving-kindness invoked as blessingNaomi, Orpah, RuthExodus 34:6-7 (YHWH’s own hesed/steadfast love self-revelation); Genesis 24:27 (hesed shown through ordinary providential circumstance)Critical — first occurrence of the book’s anchor term (see 08_core_glossary.md N1); must use the dedicated hesed compound, never txiaj ntsim (Critical-locked for salvific grace) nor a bare kev hlub.
Ruth 1:9Marital rest/security as covenant blessingNaomi (blessing Orpah/Ruth)Deuteronomy 25:5-10 (levirate-marriage “rest”/provision background, previewed)Medium — comprehension bridge to the levirate institution fully activated in ch. 3-4.
Ruth 1:14Loyalty — “clung to her”Ruth, NaomiGenesis 2:24 (“a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast [cleave] to his wife”) — same Hebrew root דָּבַק (dabaq)Medium — deliberate lexical echo of the Genesis 2:24 one-flesh covenant-union verb, repurposed for covenant-loyalty between Ruth and Naomi; translator should select a Hmong verb for “clung/held fast” that can plausibly echo marital-covenant “cleaving” language if the destination Bible tradition uses one, to preserve the intertextual resonance. Not a traditional-religion collision — a literary-echo preservation issue.
Ruth 1:16-17 (Core Passage)Loyalty oath; Gentile conversion-confession; Hesed; inseparabilityRuth, Naomi, YHWH (invoked)Joshua 24:15 (Israel’s own “choose whom you will serve” covenant-decision language); Genesis 12:1 (Abram’s call to leave homeland/kin, structural parallel to Ruth’s renunciation of Moab); Romans 8:38-39 (nothing — not even death — separates from the love of God; direct rhetorical-force parallel to Ruth 1:17’s “till death parts us,” though the referent shifts from human covenant loyalty to God’s covenant loyalty in Christ); Romans 9:25-26 (quoting Hosea 2:23/1:10: “I will call them my people, who were not my people” — the exact reversal-structure of Ruth 1:16’s “your people [will be] my people,” making this the single strongest whole-Bible echo of the core passage)Critical — see full treatment in 07_semantic_analysis.md §1. The oath-formula clause (“may the LORD do so to me”) must reuse tus Tswv exactly per the Romans-package’s forbidden divine-name-substitution rule. The people/God clause must be cross-taught with Romans 9:25-26 as its clearest NT resonance; teachers should be explicitly instructed that Ruth 1:16 is a narrative enactment, centuries earlier, of the very Gentile-inclusion principle Paul later states as doctrine by quoting Hosea. Flag [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: confirm the oath-formula phrasing does not echo any existing Hmong customary curse/oath idiom associated with spirit-invocation] (inherited from 07_semantic_analysis.md).
Ruth 1:20-21Providence; lament naming ShaddaiNaomi (renamed “Mara”)Genesis 17:1 (El Shaddai revealed to Abraham); Job 1:21, Job 2:10 (“the LORD gives and the LORD takes away… shall we not accept adversity”); Exodus 6:3High — must apply the mandatory Vajtswv hwjchim qualifier pattern (see 08_core_glossary.md N4); bare hwjchim forbidden per Romans baseline. Job parallel useful for teaching that lament-before-God is itself an act of covenant faith, not unbelief.
Ruth 1:22Providence; timing of return coinciding with barley harvestNaomi, RuthLeviticus 23:9-14 (firstfruits barley-harvest timing regulations)Low — comprehension-level agricultural detail; reinforces Doctrine 3’s “ordinary means, hidden timing” motif.

2. Cross-Reference Matrix — Ruth Chapter 2

Ruth PassageThemeRelated Character(s)OT/NT ConnectionTranslation Sensitivity
Ruth 2:1Kinsman introduced (background legal category)BoazLeviticus 25:25 (near-kinsman redemption-of-land law, institutional background)Low — ordinary kinship vocabulary (tus kwvtij, N19); technical redeemer-sense reserved for later activation.
Ruth 2:2-3, 2:7, 2:15-16Providence through ordinary law; care for the poor/foreigner/widowRuth, BoazLeviticus 19:9-10 (gleaning law); Leviticus 23:22; Deuteronomy 24:19-21 (gleaning explicitly for the poor, the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan)High — this is the legal-institutional proof that God’s provision for a Moabite widow was already written into Israel’s law before Ruth ever arrived; essential for Doctrine 3 (Providence) and Doctrine 4 (Gentile Inclusion) taught together — provision for foreigners is not an exception to the Law but embedded within it.
Ruth 2:3Providence disguised as “chance”Ruth, Boaz (narrator’s aside)Proverbs 16:33 (“the lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD”); Genesis 24:12-14 (Abraham’s servant’s providential “sign” at the well, a structurally similar “chance-that-is-not-chance” scene)Critical — see 08_core_glossary.md N3; must avoid all hmoov-family vocabulary, reusing the Romans-established forbidden-substitution precedent for fate/fortune language applied to divine action.
Ruth 2:4Covenant greeting-blessingBoaz, harvestersJudges 6:12 (“The LORD is with you”) — common ANE/Israelite blessing-greeting formulaLow — stable idiom, no collision.
Ruth 2:10, 2:13Gentile inclusion; ordinary social favor (NOT salvific grace)Ruth, BoazExodus 22:21 (“you shall not wrong a sojourner”); Deuteronomy 23:3-6 (contrastive background — Moabite exclusion, here being narratively overturned)Critical — see 08_core_glossary.md N5 and B14. LXX uses χάρις (charis) here — the identical Greek word Critical-locked in the Romans TM for salvific grace (txiaj ntsim). Forbidden substitution: txiaj ntsim must never render Ruth 2:10/2:13’s “favor.” Must use the dedicated non-soteriological rendering.
Ruth 2:12Providence; divine protection/rewardBoaz (blessing Ruth)Psalm 91:4; Psalm 17:8; Psalm 36:7 (wings/shelter imagery for divine protection); Deuteronomy 32:11 (eagle-wings imagery); Genesis 15:1 (“your reward shall be very great,” reward-for-covenant-faith parallel)Medium — see 08_core_glossary.md N9; dual usage with 3:9 must be kept interpretively distinct in teaching.
Ruth 2:20Hesed; Kinsman-Redeemer first namedNaomi (of Boaz)Leviticus 25:25 (kinsman-redemption law, now applied specifically to Boaz)Critical/High combined — this verse fuses Doctrine 1 (Hesed) and Doctrine 2 (Kinsman-Redeemer) explicitly; both the hesed compound (N1) and the kinsman-redeemer compound (N2) must appear correctly and be taught together as one verse’s double doctrinal payload.

3. Cross-Reference Matrix — Ruth Chapter 3

Ruth PassageThemeRelated Character(s)OT/NT ConnectionTranslation Sensitivity
Ruth 3:9Marriage-proposal symbol; covenant protectionRuth, BoazEzekiel 16:8 (YHWH spreading his garment corner over Jerusalem as a marriage-covenant image — the clearest OT parallel to this exact gesture); Deuteronomy 22:30/23:1 (garment-corner idiom used negatively of illicit acts, contrasted with the propriety insisted on here)Medium-High — see 08_core_glossary.md N10; must be linked in teaching to Ruth 2:12’s “wings” (N9) and distinguished from the Deuteronomy 22-23 negative idiom to avoid any impropriety misreading.
Ruth 3:10Hesed exceeding its first instanceBoaz (of Ruth)(Internal echo of Ruth 1:8 and 1:14-17)Critical — Boaz explicitly names Ruth’s action hesed, and states it now exceeds her earlier hesed (leaving Moab for Naomi); this is the doctrinal high-water mark of Doctrine 1 and must reuse the identical hesed compound (N1) established at 1:8.
Ruth 3:11Reputation; characterBoaz (of Ruth)Proverbs 31:10 (אֵשֶׁת חַיִל / eshet chayil, identical phrase used of the idealized wife)Low-Medium — see N12; positive, no collision.
Ruth 3:12-13Kinsman-Redeemer; nearer kinsman namedBoaz, unnamed nearer kinsmanLeviticus 25:25-49 (redemption-of-land/person law); Deuteronomy 25:5-10 (levirate-marriage law)High — first explicit mention of a competing, nearer redeemer; sets up ch. 4’s legal climax. Kinsman-redeemer compound term (N2) must be used consistently from here forward.
Ruth 3:13Oath formula (secondary, echoing 1:17)Boaz(Internal echo of Ruth 1:17’s oath structure); Judges 8:19 (comparable oath idiom, “as the LORD lives”)Medium — reinforces the core-passage oath convention; same tus Tswv rendering rule applies.

4. Cross-Reference Matrix — Ruth Chapter 4

Ruth PassageThemeRelated Character(s)OT/NT ConnectionTranslation Sensitivity
Ruth 4:1-8Kinsman-Redeemer; legal transaction; cost of true redemptionBoaz, unnamed kinsman, eldersLeviticus 25:25-33 (land-redemption law); Deuteronomy 25:5-10 (levirate-marriage law, including the related but distinct sandal-removal shaming custom in 25:9-10)High — the unnamed kinsman’s refusal (self-interest intact) versus Boaz’s acceptance (real personal cost) is the didactic heart of Doctrine 2 and must be rendered so the contrast is unmistakable.
Ruth 4:7-8Legal ratification customBoaz, unnamed kinsmanDeuteronomy 25:9-10 (related but distinct sandal-removal custom, there a public shaming for levirate refusal; here a neutral legal-transfer ratification)Low-Medium — see N14; comprehension-only, requires explanatory footnote; care needed not to import Deuteronomy’s shaming connotation where Ruth’s version carries none.
Ruth 4:10, 4:5Levirate purpose — preserving the dead man’s name/lineBoaz, Ruth, Mahlon (deceased)Deuteronomy 25:6 (“that his name may not be blotted out from Israel”); Genesis 38:8-9 (Onan’s levirate duty to his brother, negative precedent explicitly recalled by the “Tamar” reference in 4:12)Medium — see N13; the verb “raise up” (Hebrew qum / LXX ἀνίστημι) shares its root with NT resurrection vocabulary (ἀνάστασις), giving this clause an unplanned but real typological resonance worth a teaching note connecting Ruth’s “raising up a name” to Christ’s own resurrection, from whose line Obed’s descendant would come.
Ruth 4:11-12Blessing invoking matriarchal precedentElders, townspeople (blessing Boaz/Ruth)Genesis 29:31-30:24 (Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s wives, mothers of the twelve tribes); Genesis 38:6-30 (Tamar and Perez, the earlier levirate precedent explicitly named)Medium — reuses baseline TM’s sanctioned koob hmoov slot for ordinary material/fertility blessing; must not blend with the hesed doctrine term (N1) or with txiaj ntsim. See 08_core_glossary.md N15.
Ruth 4:13Providence; God grants conceptionRuth, BoazGenesis 29:31 (“the LORD opened her womb”); Genesis 30:22 (“God remembered Rachel… and opened her womb”)Low-Medium — reinforces Doctrine 3; parallels the patriarchal-narrative pattern of God directly enabling covenant lineage.
Ruth 4:14-15Naomi’s restoration; resolution of the Mara lamentNaomi, women of BethlehemJob 42:10-12 (Job’s latter days blessed more than his former, a structurally similar lament-to-restoration arc)Low-Medium — resolves the ch. 1 Naomi/Mara name-wordplay (N16); should be cross-referenced in teaching back to Ruth 1:20-21.
Ruth 4:17-22Genealogy — Davidic and Messianic lineObed, Jesse, David; (Boaz, Ruth as parents of Obed)1 Samuel 16:1-13 (David’s anointing); 1 Chronicles 2:12-15 (parallel genealogy); Matthew 1:5-6 (Ruth’s own genealogy repeated verbatim in Christ’s genealogy: “…and Boaz the father of Obed, and Obed the father of Jesse, and Jesse the father of David… and David the father of Solomon”); Matthew 1:1 (“The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ” — Βίβλος γενέσεως, γένεσις being the same Greek root as LXX Ruth 4:18’s γενέσεις); Luke 3:31-33 (parallel Lukan genealogy through David)Critical — this is the doctrinal climax of Doctrine 6 and the terminus of the entire book’s narrative logic: a Moabite Gentile’s covenant-loyalty oath (1:16-17) becomes, four chapters later, the genealogical hinge of the Messianic line. This connection is not optional background — it must be explicitly taught via footnote or lesson content in every curriculum unit touching ch. 4, or Doctrine 6 is reduced to “a list of unfamiliar names.” Proper-name transliterations (Auved/Obed, Yexi/Jesse, Davi/David, Npau-a/Boaz) require [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: confirm existing Hmong OT transliteration standards against the Vaj Lug Kub Npaiv Npaum tradition].

5. Messianic References and Typology Summary

Type/Antitype or EchoRuth AnchorFulfillment/NT ConnectionDoctrine(s)Translation Sensitivity
Boaz as type of the Kinsman-RedeemerRuth 3:9, 3:12-13; Ruth 4:1-10Romans 3:24 (redemption in Christ Jesus); Galatians 3:13 (Christ redeemed us); Ephesians 1:7 (redemption through his blood); Titus 2:14 (gave himself to redeem us); 1 Peter 1:18-19 (redeemed not with silver or gold but with the precious blood of Christ)2 (Kinsman-Redeemer)High — Boaz redeems with his own resources at real but limited personal cost; Christ redeems at the cost of his own life. Teaching must preserve both the continuity (a near-kinsman voluntarily pays a real price) and the discontinuity (Boaz’s cost is finite and recoverable; Christ’s is total and unrepeatable) — do not let the type eclipse the infinitely greater antitype.
Ruth’s Gentile inclusion as pattern for the Gentile churchRuth 1:16 (“your people, my people; your God, my God”); Ruth 2:10-12; Ruth 4:13-17Romans 9:25-26 (quoting Hosea 2:23/1:10, “I will call them my people, who were not my people”); Romans 11:17-24 (Gentiles grafted into the olive tree — direct conceptual parallel already logged in the Romans baseline TM as grafted_olive_tree); Ephesians 2:11-13, 19 (once far off, now fellow citizens); Galatians 3:28-294 (Gentile Inclusion)Critical — this is the single strongest cross-curriculum theological bridge between Ruth and Romans. The Romans package’s own grafted_olive_tree and nations_gentiles entries should be explicitly cited in any lesson teaching Ruth 1:16 or Ruth 4, so learners see one continuous biblical argument rather than two unrelated books.
Inseparability of covenant loveRuth 1:17 (“till death parts us”)Romans 8:38-39 (“neither death, nor life… shall be able to separate us from the love of God”)1 (Hesed), 5 (Loyalty)Medium — rhetorical/structural parallel, not a direct quotation; referent shifts from human vow to divine promise. Useful pedagogically but must not be taught as though Ruth’s human oath and Romans 8’s divine guarantee are of equal ontological weight — Ruth’s oath can in principle be broken by a lesser power than death (though it is not); Romans 8’s promise cannot be broken by any power whatsoever.
Genealogical hinge to David and ChristRuth 4:17-22Matthew 1:1, 5-6 (Christ’s genealogy through Boaz-Ruth-Obed-Jesse-David); Luke 3:31-336 (Genealogy)Critical — see full treatment in matrix row above (Ruth 4:17-22). Must be taught as a direct, unbroken textual link, not merely a thematic resonance.
”Raising up a name” and resurrection-root vocabularyRuth 4:5, 4:10 (Hebrew qum; LXX ἀνίστημι)1 Corinthians 15:4, 20 (Christ “raised” — ἐγείρω/ἀνίστημι family); general NT resurrection vocabulary6 (Genealogy), 2 (Kinsman-Redeemer)Medium — an unplanned but genuine verb-root resonance, not a doctrinal claim that Ruth 4 “predicts” the resurrection; present as a secondary, illustrative teaching note only, clearly distinguished from the primary genealogical typology above.
Naomi’s emptiness-to-fullness arcRuth 1:21 (“I went away full, and the LORD has brought me back empty”) vs. Ruth 4:14-17 (restoration/fullness)Loose thematic resonance with Philippians 2:6-8 (Christ’s self-emptying) and 2 Corinthians 8:9 (his poverty, our riches)3 (Providence)Low-Medium — flagged explicitly as a thematic resonance only, not a tight typology; do not present Naomi as a type of Christ in formal doctrinal teaching, since the correspondence is emptying-to-fullness in general shape only, not a structured redemptive act.

6. Parallels to the Romans Language Package and Rendering-Consistency Rules

Because Ruth and Romans are both curricula within this same Hmong Bible-translation pipeline, and because the Septuagint (LXX) of Ruth shares several Greek lexical items directly with Paul’s Greek in Romans, the following rendering-consistency rules are mandatory for any Phase 2 content that teaches both books, cites one from within the other, or reuses shared vocabulary:

Shared Greek/Hebrew TermRomans Rendering (fixed TM)Ruth Rendering (proposed, pending ratification)Consistency Rule
κύριος (Lord/YHWH)tus Tswvtus Tswv (Ruth 1:17 oath formula, Ruth 3:13)Identical reuse mandatory. No divine-name substitution (e.g., transliterated “Yehauvas”) in either book, per Romans §3.1 forbidden-substitution table.
θεός (God)VajtswvVajtswv (Ruth 1:16)Identical reuse mandatory.
χάρις (favor/grace)txiaj ntsim — Critical-locked, salvific sense ONLYkev tau txais kev hlub tshua / kev pom zoo ntsoov — Ruth 2:2,10,13, ordinary social-favor sense ONLYSense-based split is mandatory, not optional. The identical Greek word carries two different Hmong renderings across the two curricula because the referent differs (unmerited salvific grace vs. an everyday ANE social petition). txiaj ntsim must never appear in a Ruth 2 lesson; the Ruth-specific rendering must never appear in a Romans 3-4 lesson. Any content teaching both books side-by-side must explicitly explain this split, not silently apply one rendering to both.
ἔλεος (mercy)txoj kev khuv leej (Romans 9, 11 — Medium risk)Related to but not identical with Ruth’s chesed (Ruth 1:8, LXX renders chesed as ἔλεος); the dedicated hesed compound (N1, txoj kev hlub ruaj khov raws li lo lus cog tseg) must be used for chesed, never txoj kev khuv leej aloneDo not substitute. The LXX’s translational choice (rendering chesed with ἔλεος) reflects Greek’s narrower vocabulary, not Hebrew’s broader concept; Hmong must not inherit the LXX’s flattening. Teaching content citing both Romans 9/11’s mercy language and Ruth’s hesed language must explain that Ruth’s term is broader and covenant-anchored, Romans’ txoj kev khuv leej narrower (compassion toward the miserable).
ἀπολύτρωσις / ἀγχιστεύς (redemption)kev txhiv (Romans 3:24, 8:23 — ransom-price sense)tus kwvtij uas muaj cai thiab luag num txhiv (Ruth 2:20, 3:9, 3:12-13, 4:1-10 — kinship-legal-right sense)Shared root, distinct compound, mandatory cross-teaching. The Ruth compound deliberately retains the txhiv root so the typological link to Christ’s redemption is visible, but adds the kinship-qualifier so the two institutions (family redemption-right vs. ransom-by-price) are not collapsed into one. Any lesson teaching Boaz as a type of Christ must explicitly walk through both halves of this rule.
θάνατος (death)txoj kev tuag (Low risk in Romans)txoj kev tuag (Ruth 1:17 — same lexical rendering, but flagged with elevated cultural weight per 07_semantic_analysis.md, since Hmong clan-burial custom gives Ruth’s “till death parts us, and there I will be buried” far more emotional weight than the Romans context carries)Identical lexical reuse; risk-tier annotation differs by book, not the rendering itself. Do not invent an alternate Ruth-specific death-term; instead attach the Ruth-specific teaching note about clan-burial renunciation wherever this term is taught in Ruth.
ἀγαπάω / ἀγάπη (love)kev hlub (Low risk)kev hlub (Ruth 4:15, “your daughter-in-law who loves you”)Identical reuse mandatory. Also functions as a compositional building-block inside the Ruth-specific hesed compound (N1); teachers should note that kev hlub alone is necessary but insufficient for hesed — hence the fuller N1 compound exists.
δύναμις / hwjchim qualifier patternVajtswv hwjchim (mandatory qualifier; bare hwjchim forbidden)Vajtswv uas muaj Hwjchim Loj Kawg Nkaus (Ruth 1:20-21, rendering Shaddai)Qualifier-pattern reuse mandatory. The Romans rule that bare hwjchim is forbidden (identical to a shaman’s ritual power) applies without exception to the Ruth “Almighty” title; Ruth must not introduce a shortcut bare form even for a divine-title-specific occurrence.
ἔθνη / λαός (nations/Gentiles/peoples)lwm Haiv Neeg (Gentiles, built on the haiv neeg root)haiv neeg root reused compositionally in Ruth 1:16’s “your people, my people” (N6)Shared root, opposite narrative direction — must be explicitly taught together. Romans describes Gentiles as a category from Israel’s viewpoint; Ruth narrates a Gentile individual’s self-renunciation of outsider status. A lesson teaching both should explicitly connect Ruth 1:16 forward to Romans 9:25-26’s Hosea quotation (see §5 above), since both use the same “people” vocabulary root to describe the same theological reality from opposite temporal ends.
κληρονομία / κληρονόμος (inheritance/heir)tus qub txeeg qub teg (Low risk)tus qub txeeg qub teg (Ruth 4:1-10 inheritance-preservation context)Identical reuse mandatory. Already validated positive cultural bridge in both books; no divergence needed.
μάρτυς (witness)tus timkhawv (Low risk)tus timkhawv (Ruth 4:9, 4:11 gate-elders)Identical reuse mandatory.
εἴδωλον (idol)dab mlom (High risk)dab mlom (background term for Moab’s gods, contrasted implicitly in Ruth 1:15-16)Identical reuse mandatory when this background concept is taught explicitly in a Ruth lesson, even though the Hebrew/Greek word itself is not textually present in Ruth.
γένεσις (genealogy)(not present in Romans TM — Romans does not use this Greek noun as a technical term)Ruth 4:18 LXX γενέσεις; directly shared with Matthew 1:1’s Βίβλος γενέσεωςNew shared term — not yet in any TM. [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: this term will recur in any future Matthew Language Package; a consistent Hmong rendering for "book/record of genealogy" should be established now and logged for forward TM-revision review, rather than independently invented later.]

General rendering-consistency principle for Phase 2 generation: wherever Ruth and Romans share a Greek or Hebrew lexical root, the default assumption must be shared rendering unless a documented sense-distinction requires otherwise (as with χάρις and ἔλεος above). Any new sense-based split proposed during Phase 2 generation that is not already documented in this table must be flagged [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: proposed new sense-split for <term>] rather than resolved silently.


7. Escalation and Review Flags Summary

The following flags, already raised in 07_semantic_analysis.md and 08_core_glossary.md, are restated here because they intersect directly with cross-reference content and must not be silently resolved during Phase 2 generation:

  1. [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: confirm "Rus" is the form used in the existing Vaj Lug Kub Npaiv Npaum (HWB) Hmong Bible tradition] — affects every citation in this document.
  2. [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: confirm standard Hmong book-name abbreviations for Genesis, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Hosea, Ezekiel, Matthew, Luke, Galatians, Ephesians, Titus, 1 Peter] — affects every cross-reference row above citing a non-Ruth/non-Romans book.
  3. [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: confirm the oath-formula phrasing (Ruth 1:17, 3:13) does not echo any existing Hmong customary curse/oath idiom associated with spirit-invocation] — Critical-tier, inherited from 07_semantic_analysis.md.
  4. [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: confirm existing Hmong OT transliteration standards for Obed/Jesse/David/Boaz/Perez] — affects Ruth 4:17-22 and its Matthew 1 / Luke 3 cross-references.
  5. [TRANSLATOR REVIEW NEEDED: this term will recur in any future Matthew Language Package] — γένεσις/genealogy shared-term flag, §6 above.

All Critical and High risk cross-reference rows in §§1-6 require human-theologian pre-publication review before any Phase 2 content built on them may be published, per the routing convention established in assets/doctrine_risk_registry.json.

Library content is free and openly licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 — share and adapt it for non-commercial use, with attribution to tri-bible.ai.

Give feedback

How would you rate this page?

0 / 500 words