06 — Linguistic Gap Analysis: Titus (English/Koine Greek → Maithili)

0. Purpose and Method

This analysis identifies, for the destination language Maithili, where the existing lexical stock (a) has no adequate term at all for a Titus doctrine-load-bearing concept (“missing vocabulary”), (b) has too many competing terms, each carrying its own strong non-Christian religious freight, such that a bare choice among them would smuggle in unwanted meaning (“crowded semantic neighborhoods”), and (c) requires a considered decision between transliterating a term (preserving foreignness deliberately) versus paraphrasing/coining a native compound. It closes with a ranked list of the letter’s highest-risk ambiguities for Phase 2 routing priority.

This analysis does not repeat term-by-term doctrinal argumentation already recorded in 08_core_glossary.md and assets/bible_term_registry.json; it instead names the linguistic shape of each problem — what kind of gap it is, and why the recommended strategy in those documents is linguistically necessary rather than merely stylistic.

All three chapters of Titus are covered. Titus is a short, single-scene pastoral letter (no narrative material, no OT quotation blocks), so unlike a longer curriculum book, every chapter here contributes directly to the seven named doctrines with no purely genealogical or travel-notice material requiring a “reviewed, no new terms” placeholder — except Titus 3:12–15 (travel plans, greetings), which is explicitly noted as reviewed with no new doctrinal vocabulary below.

---

1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

For each of the seven curriculum doctrines: what Maithili vocabulary is already available (from the Romans baseline or general usage), what is structurally weak about it for Titus’s specific claims, and the recommended strategy.

1.1 Grace That Trains for Godly Living (Titus 2:11–14)

Available Maithili terms	Weakness	Recommended strategy
अनुग्रह (grace, fixed baseline)	Adequate as a noun for the gift, but Titus’s distinctive move is grace as grammatical subject of an active verb — grace “appears” (ἐπεφάνη) and grace “trains” (παιδεύουσα). Maithili has no existing devotional vocabulary in which an abstract quality is personified as an active moral tutor; the nearest available frame is a human guru training a disciple.	Retain अनुग्रह unchanged; supply a mandatory syntactic/theological note at 2:11–12 clarifying that grace itself, not a guru or teaching-lineage, is the subject performing प्रशिक्षित करब.
भक्ति, श्रद्धा, धर्मपरायणता (candidate “godliness” renderings)	All three are already crowded (भक्ति and श्रद्धा barred at the baseline “faith” entry for full bhakti-tradition weight; धर्म-root barred throughout). None names grace-produced transformed living; all three name a devotee-initiated posture toward a deity.	Coin परमेश्वरनिष्ठा (see §3 below) — this is a genuine missing-vocabulary gap, not merely a crowded neighborhood, since no existing word cleanly names “godliness as fruit of grace” rather than “devotion as human religious effort.”
गुरु-शिक्षा, तालीम, दीक्षा (candidate “training” renderings)	गुरु-शिक्षा and दीक्षा both activate the guru-śiṣya paramparā (teaching-lineage initiation) frame, in which a disciple receives transmitted teaching from a living human master, often marked by a formal initiation rite (दीक्षा). This is a live, high-prestige framework in Mithila’s own Vaishnava and Shaiva institutional life.	Coin प्रशिक्षित करब / प्रशिक्षण (a de-lineage-marked, generic “train/discipline” pairing); mandatory note per §1 above.

1.2 Qualifications for Elders (Titus 1:5–9)

Available Maithili terms	Weakness	Recommended strategy
प्राचीन (bare “elder”)	Bare प्राचीन reads as a village/community elder or joint-family patriarch, whose authority in Mithila rests on age, caste-lineage seniority, or Panjikaran-verified genealogical standing — not on an appointed, qualification-tested church office.	Mandatory qualifier मण्डलीक (“of the congregation”) at every occurrence: मण्डलीक प्राचीन. Never bare प्राचीन.
पंडित	Superficially attractive as “religious office-holder,” but पंडित in Mithila specifically names the custodian of the Panjikaran genealogical registry — an institutionally specific caste-verification role with no relation to spiritual oversight of a congregation.	Excluded outright (consistent with the baseline’s rejection of पंडित for “apostle”).
बिशप (transliteration)	Mithila/North India has no historic episcopal ecclesial tradition to anchor a transliterated “bishop” term; it would read as an unfamiliar foreign loanword rather than a meaningful office name.	Reject transliteration; use अध्यक्ष (a native word meaning “one who presides/oversees”) with a mandatory structural note that ἐπίσκοπος and πρεσβύτερος name the SAME office in 1:5–7.
एक पत्नीक पति (“husband of one wife”)	This is not a missing-vocabulary problem (the phrase is linguistically simple) but a live cultural-collision problem: historic Maithil Brahmin kulin polygamy custom (multiple wives taken partly to enhance lineage prestige within the Panjikaran system) makes a vague “faithful husband” rendering dangerously compatible with plural marriage in local memory.	Render with maximal concrete specificity, never softened to “faithful”; flag for joint theologian + native-speaker review at every occurrence (sole occurrence 1:6).

1.3 Sound Doctrine and Good Works (Titus 1:9,1:13,1:16; 2:1,2:7–8,2:10,2:15; 3:1,3:8,3:14)

Available Maithili terms	Weakness	Recommended strategy
शुद्ध शिक्षा, सत्य सिद्धान्त (candidate “sound doctrine” renderings)	Both flatten Paul’s deliberate health/illness metaphor (ὑγιαίνουσα, “healthy”) into a generic “correct/pure teaching” register, losing the diagnostic contrast with the “sick,” divisive false teaching of 1:10–16 and 3:9–11 — a metaphor that is pastorally load-bearing (believers are meant to recognize false doctrine by its symptoms).	Render स्वस्थ शिक्षा (“healthy teaching”), preserving the metaphor literally; this is available native vocabulary, not a gap, but risks being silently “improved” toward शुद्ध/सत्य by a translator not alerted to the deliberate metaphor.
सुकर्म, पुण्य कर्म (candidate “good works” renderings)	Both route through the Sanskrit कर्म root, which in everyday Maithili religious idiom carries strong karma-merit-accumulation associations (deeds generating future reward/rebirth outcome) — precisely the works-merit framework Titus 3:5–8 exists to deny as salvation’s basis while still affirming works as salvation’s fruit.	Render नीक काज (native काज, “deed/work,” + नीक, “good,” avoiding कर्म entirely); this is a genuine missing-vocabulary gap requiring deliberate native-compound coinage, not a simple synonym swap. Six occurrences require byte-for-byte consistency.

1.4 Salvation by Grace not Works (Titus 2:11; 3:4–7)

Available Maithili terms	Weakness	Recommended strategy
उद्धार (fixed baseline)	Adequate for the noun, but 3:5’s negation — “not by works done in righteousness which we have done” — is the letter’s single sharpest anti-merit statement, sitting in a language where karma-merit reasoning is the default explanatory frame for any deliverance/reward claim. A flat negation can be silently softened in either direction (works “still help somewhat,” or an overcorrected māyā-adjacent “works are illusory/irrelevant,” contradicting 3:8/3:14’s positive good-works instruction).	Render the full clause धार्मिकताक कामक कारणे नहि as an inseparable unit, never abbreviated; mandatory human theologian review, since this is a syntactic-scope ambiguity risk more than a vocabulary gap — the individual words are all already fixed.
त्राता (candidate “Savior”)	त्राता carries epic-hero-rescuer connotations (a mighty deliverer figure within a narrative, resonant with Ramayana-adjacent rescue-narrative vocabulary) rather than the unique, historical, once-for-all NT Savior.	Render उद्धारकर्ता (built transparently on the fixed उद्धार root); mandatory note distinguishing this single historical Savior from the Bhagavad Gītā’s own self-declared periodically-appearing divine-rescuer motif (Gītā 4.7–8), a genuinely close conceptual neighbor in this audience’s own devotional literature.
दया vs अनुग्रह	Not a gap — both words exist and are correct for their respective concepts (mercy vs. grace) — but Titus places them in unusually close proximity (1:4; 3:5,3:7), creating a collapse risk: an under-attentive translator could treat them as loose synonyms and alternate between them inconsistently.	Explicit co-occurrence note required wherever both appear in the same verse-span, reinforcing that they name distinct-but-complementary divine dispositions.

1.5 Regeneration by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5–7)

Available Maithili terms	Weakness	Recommended strategy
पुनर्जन्म (literal gloss of παλιγγενεσία, “again-birth”)	ABSOLUTE COLLISION: this is the exact standard Maithili/Hindi term for Hindu reincarnation — rebirth of the soul across successive lives, the very cycle from which Vaishnava/Shaiva devotional practice seeks liberation. A literal morpheme-for-morpheme gloss of the Greek lands directly on the forbidden term.	Render नवजन्म (नव, “new,” replacing पुनर्, “again/re-”), naming a single, decisive, non-repeatable re-origination. This is the single highest-stakes lexical decision in the entire book. Mandatory theologian review, no exceptions.
स्नान (candidate “washing” rendering)	Carries strong regional ritual/pilgrimage-bathing associations (Ganga-snān, tīrtha-snān) — a repeatable purification act performed by the worshipper, the reverse of the once-for-all reality Titus 3:5 names.	Render धोवन (a more neutral washing/cleansing term without the pilgrimage-ritual register).
मोक्ष (already Critical-forbidden, baseline)	“Eternal life” (ζωὴ αἰώνιος, 1:2; 3:7) risks being heard as a periphrasis for moksha — liberation into an impersonal absolute or cessation of individuated existence — if not explicitly anchored as unending personal, relational life with a personal God.	Render अनन्त जीवन with mandatory clarifying note at first occurrence (1:2) distinguishing personal relational life from impersonal liberation.
प्रारब्ध, भाग्य (candidate “hope” renderings, both already Critical-flagged in the baseline for providence/election)	Neither is used for “hope” as such, but the surrounding conceptual field (confident expectation about one’s future destiny) is exactly where fatalistic vocabulary intrudes by default in everyday Maithili religious speech.	Render आशा, with the same fatalism-avoidance discipline already established in the Romans baseline for providence/election; pair with धन्य (“blessed”) at 2:13.

1.6 Submission to Authority (Titus 2:5,2:9; 3:1)

Available Maithili terms	Weakness	Recommended strategy
वशीभूत होएब (candidate ὑποτάσσω rendering)	Suggests coerced domination/subjugation (being made subject by force), the opposite of Paul’s voluntary, gospel-witness-motivated ordering under legitimate authority.	Render अधीन रहब / अधीनता, with mandatory note per occurrence (three distinct domains: wives/husbands 2:5; slaves/masters 2:9; citizens/rulers 3:1) that this is voluntary self-ordering for the gospel’s sake, never a general warrant for caste-based subordination or coerced bonded labor.
दास (for household δοῦλος, 2:9) vs सेवक (for Paul’s self-designation δοῦλος θεοῦ, 1:1)	Both trace to the same Greek word, but using one Maithili term for both would collapse Paul’s dignified self-identification into the same register as the literal ancient household-slavery context of 2:9 — a context requiring substantial disambiguation from contemporary caste-based servitude or bonded labor, which the text neither endorses nor delegitimizes by silence.	Maintain the register split: सेवक (Paul, 1:1) vs दास आ स्वामी (2:9), each with its own note; mandatory human theologian review for 2:9 given its cultural sensitivity.
शासक आ अधिकारी (candidate ἀρχαί/ἐξουσίαι rendering)	Not a vocabulary gap, but a resonance risk: Mithila’s own historic self-identity as the ancient kingdom of Raja Janak could pull “rulers and authorities” toward an idealized dynastic-kingdom register rather than present civic government.	Frame explicitly as present-day civic government in any accompanying teaching note.

1.7 Avoiding Divisive Controversies (Titus 3:9–11)

Available Maithili terms	Weakness	Recommended strategy
विधर्मी (candidate “divisive person” / αἱρετικός rendering)	Reads as an abstract doctrinal-heresy classification (implying a formal excommunication procedure) rather than Paul’s actual pastoral target: a habitually schism-causing individual within a specific congregation.	Render the native compound फूट डालनिहार (“one who causes/inserts division”), which is behavioral/relational rather than classificatory — matching Paul’s own pastoral (not canonical-heresy) framing.
वंशावली (γενεαλογία, “genealogies”)	Not a missing-vocabulary problem — वंशावली is the correct, obvious word — but an acute collision-by-resonance problem: it names Panjikaran, Mithila’s own living genealogical-registry institution for marriage-lineage verification, a socially load-bearing and respected practice. A careless rendering could be heard as Scripture condemning Panjikaran itself.	Mandatory teaching note: Paul targets speculative theological pedigree-claims used to fuel division, a narrower target than, and not a condemnation of, the region’s genealogical record-keeping custom.
व्यर्थ विवाद, कलह (candidate “foolish controversies/strife” renderings)	No gap; standard vocabulary. Risk is purely of under-translation (flattening Paul’s specific “quarrels about the law,” μάχας νομικάς, into generic “arguments”) losing the specific first-century Judaizing-controversy referent.	Retain the compound कलह आ व्यवस्था-सम्बन्धी झगड़ा to keep the Law-controversy referent visible, reusing the fixed व्यवस्था root.

Chapter coverage note: Titus 3:12–15 (travel arrangements for Artemas/Tychicus/Zenas/Apollos, greetings, benediction) is reviewed and contributes only Section-3-tier proper names (transliterated per established convention) and no new doctrinal vocabulary; it is explicitly marked here as reviewed rather than silently omitted.

---

2. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

2.1 Missing Vocabulary (no adequate existing Maithili term — coinage/compounding required)

These are concepts for which ordinary Maithili usage simply has no existing word or phrase that captures the required Christian theological sense without either (a) importing an unwanted competing framework or (b) requiring an entirely new native compound.

Concept	Why no existing term suffices	Coinage adopted
ἐπιφάνεια (epiphany/appearing)	No existing Maithili word names a once-for-all, non-repeatable divine becoming-visible; the only available conceptual slot for “a deity becoming visible among humans” is अवतार (avatar), which is repeatable/cyclical by definition and therefore categorically wrong.	प्रकट होएब / प्रकटीकरण, with mandatory distinguishing note at every occurrence (2:11; 2:13; 3:4).
παιδεύω (training, as grace’s own action)	No existing word names impersonal/abstract-subject moral formation apart from a human guru-figure or ascetic self-effort.	प्रशिक्षित करब / प्रशिक्षण, with mandatory agent-clarifying note.
εὐσέβεια (godliness, as grace-produced fruit)	Existing devotion-vocabulary (भक्ति, श्रद्धा, धर्मपरायणता) all names human-initiated devotional posture, not grace-produced transformed character; none is neutral of that direction-of-causation problem.	परमेश्वरनिष्ठा (coined compound: परमेश्वर + निष्ठा).
παλιγγενεσία (regeneration)	The only linguistically transparent gloss (पुनर्जन्म) is the exact word for the forbidden concept (reincarnation); no neutral native equivalent pre-exists.	नवजन्म (deliberately substituting नव for पुनर्).
καλῶν/ἀγαθῶν ἔργων (good works, as grace’s fruit not salvation’s cause)	Existing “good deed” vocabulary (सुकर्म, पुण्य कर्म) routes through कर्म, activating karma-merit reasoning incompatible with 3:5’s flat denial that works save.	नीक काज (native काज + नीक, avoiding कर्म entirely).
ἀσέβεια (ungodliness)	Same problem as εὐσέβεια above, mirrored negatively; अधर्म and अभक्ति both route through barred roots.	ईश्वरविहीनता (coined: ईश्वर + विहीनता, “God-lessness”).
μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἀνήρ (husband of one wife) as an unambiguous concrete standard	Not a lexical gap (the words exist) but a pragmatic gap: no existing polite/vague Maithili marital-fidelity phrase communicates the concrete numerical specificity Paul intends, given the region’s own kulin-polygamy social memory pulling toward a softer reading.	एक पत्नीक पति, deliberately concrete and numerically explicit rather than idiomatic.

2.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (multiple existing terms, each with unwanted freight — require fencing)

These are concepts where Maithili has too many plausible existing words, each already carrying strong extra-biblical religious meaning; the task here is not coinage but fencing — selecting one term and explicitly restricting its scope via a mandatory note, so the other neighbors are not silently activated in the reader’s mind.

Concept	Competing existing terms	Fencing decision
godliness / devotion	भक्ति, श्रद्धा, धर्मपरायणता, निष्ठा	निष्ठा selected precisely because it is the least crowded of the four (no dominant bhakti-tradition association); भक्ति and श्रद्धा explicitly fenced off, reusing the Romans-baseline fencing already established for “faith.”
purity/purification	शुद्ध, अशुद्ध, पवित्र, स्नान	पवित्र reserved for moral/relational set-apartness (Romans-baseline fixed sense); शुद्ध/अशुद्ध permitted only in Titus 1:15’s specific conscience-purity teaching, with a note preventing a slide toward Panjikaran-adjacent ritual/lineage-purity connotations; स्नान fenced out entirely for “washing” (3:5) in favor of धोवन.
ज्ञान (knowledge)	ज्ञान (jñāna-mārga associations), विवेक, सत्यक ज्ञान	सत्यक ज्ञान retained (ज्ञान qualified by सत्यक, “of the truth”) with mandatory note that this is revealed doctrinal knowledge of Christ, not Vedantic jñāna-mārga mystical self-realization/liberation-knowledge.
love	प्रेम (crowded: also names Vidyapati’s Radha-Krishna erotic-devotional prema-bhakti tradition), स्नेह, वात्सल्य	प्रेम retained (no better native alternative exists) but fenced by mandatory note at every occurrence (2:2) distinguishing selfless covenantal ἀγάπη from romantic/erotic prema.
self-control / restraint	संयम (crowded: overlaps tapasya-style ascetic self-discipline), तप, नियंत्रण	संयम retained, fenced by mandatory note that this is Spirit/grace-enabled fruit (2:11–12’s own training), not merit-earning ascetic achievement.
Savior/rescuer	उद्धारकर्ता, त्राता (epic-hero-rescuer resonance), भगवान (bare, devotional-object ambiguity per Romans baseline)	उद्धारकर्ता selected (built transparently on the already-fenced उद्धार root); त्राता and bare भगवान explicitly excluded.
pleasure/sensory craving	सुख-भोग, वासना (karmic latent-impression resonance), भोग alone (karma-doctrine resonance: accumulated sensory experience tied to past-life merit)	सुख-भोग retained with a note distinguishing it from भोग’s karma-doctrine resonance; वासना excluded entirely (parallel to its exclusion for “worldly passions,” 2:12).
charity/goodness toward others	भलाई, परोपकार (dharmic merit-generating charitable-duty resonance), दया (reserved for ἔλεος specifically)	भलाई (χρηστότης, 3:4) and मानव-प्रेम (φιλανθρωπία, 3:4) both selected specifically to avoid परोपकार’s merit-generating-duty resonance.
elder/office vs. age	प्राचीन (crowded: village/caste/patriarchal elder), बुजुर्ग, अध्यक्ष	मण्डलीक प्राचीन (office, qualified) fenced apart from bare बुजुर्ग पुरुष/बुजुर्ग स्त्री (age-only, 2:2–3), with mandatory disambiguation note given the shared Greek root πρεσβύτερος/πρεσβύτης.
household service	दास, सेवक, नौकर	सेवक reserved for Paul’s dignified self-designation (1:1); दास आ स्वामी reserved for the literal ancient household-slavery context (2:9), each fenced from the other by register-level note.

---

3. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Titus presents fewer proper-name transliteration questions than Romans (no extended OT genealogical material), but several genuine decision points arise for theological-concept terms where transliteration was considered and rejected, plus the standard proper-name transliterations.

Term	Transliteration considered?	Decision	Rationale
ἐπιφάνεια (epiphany)	Yes — “एपिफनी” considered	Rejected; paraphrase (प्रकट होएब/प्रकटीकरण) adopted	A transliterated loanword would read as opaque technical jargon to this audience, unlike “Amen”/“Hallelujah,” which already have currency; a meaningful native paraphrase carrying a mandatory disambiguating note better serves comprehension while still fencing off अवतार.
παλιγγενεσία (regeneration)	Yes — “पालिन्गेनेसिया” considered, immediately rejected	Rejected; native coinage (नवजन्म) adopted	Transliteration would fail to communicate at all to a first-time reader; paraphrase is unavoidable, but the specific paraphrase choice (नव- not पुनर्-) is the entire risk-mitigation strategy.
σωτήρ (Savior)	No — considered only among native options	उद्धारकर्ता adopted (built on fixed उद्धार root)	Consistency with the already-transliteration-free Romans baseline salvation vocabulary; introducing a transliterated “सोतर” would break vocabulary continuity across the wider nine-book curriculum.
μεσίτης-adjacent titles (none occur in Titus)	N/A	N/A	Titus does not use κύριος as a title or μεσίτης; no decision required here (see Section 1 of 08_core_glossary.md, noting these baseline terms are not load-bearing in this letter).
ἐπίσκοπος (overseer)	Yes — “बिशप” considered	Rejected; native अध्यक्ष adopted	No historic episcopal tradition in the region to anchor the loanword; it would read as foreign administrative jargon rather than a meaningful spiritual-office term.
Proper names: Ἀρτεμᾶς, Τυχικός, Ζηνᾶς, Ἀπολλῶς, Νικόπολις, Κρῆτες, Κρήτη	Yes — standard practice	Transliterate per established North Indian Bible-translation convention: अर्तेमास, तुखिकुस, जेनास, अपुल्लोस, निकुपुलिस, क्रेती, क्रेते	Proper names carry no doctrinal ambiguity risk; consistent transliteration aids reader recognition across parallel translations.
Ἀββά-type intimacy terms (none occur in Titus)	N/A	N/A	The baseline’s अब्बा transliteration (Romans 8:15) is not triggered by any Titus passage; noted for completeness only.
πιστὸς ὁ λόγος (trustworthy saying formula)	No — paraphrase only	ई बात विश्वासयोग्य अछि adopted as a fixed formula	A formulaic paraphrase (not a single-word transliteration) is required because this is a recurring rhetorical marker across the Pastoral Epistles; fixing the exact wording now protects consistency if 1–2 Timothy are added to this language package later.

General transliteration policy for Titus: transliterate only (a) proper names and (b) already-established liturgical exclamations per the baseline (आमीन, हल्लेलूयाह — neither occurs in Titus but the policy is noted for consistency). All doctrinal-concept terms are paraphrased/coined in native Maithili vocabulary, because Titus’s theological vocabulary has no pre-existing transliteration tradition to draw on (unlike, say, “Messiah” or “Amen,” which arrive already familiar through wider North Indian Christian usage) — introducing new transliterated technical terms here would create opaque jargon rather than accessible doctrine.

---

4. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × likelihood of unintended syncretistic reading), for Phase 2 review-priority routing.

1. παλιγγενεσία / “regeneration” (Titus 3:5) — Direct lexical collision with the forbidden reincarnation term पुनर्जन्म. Single highest-risk item in the letter; a translator working quickly or under Hindi-influence could gloss this literally and destroy the doctrine outright. Mandatory theologian review, no exceptions.

2. ἐπιφάνεια / “appearing” across 2:11, 2:13, 3:4 — Three occurrences in close proximity, each vulnerable to being heard through the region’s own geographically “owned” avatar-descent narrative (Mithila as the Ramayana’s setting). Compounded by occurring twice in the core passage (Titus 2:11–3:8).

3. οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων τῶν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ / “not by works of righteousness” (Titus 3:5) — The letter’s sharpest anti-merit statement, sitting inside a language whose default explanatory frame for deliverance is karma-merit; risk runs in two directions (softened toward “works still help” or overcorrected toward works-are-illusory), and either failure mode contradicts other explicit Titus teaching (3:8, 3:14).

4. μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἀνήρ / “husband of one wife” (Titus 1:6) — Not primarily a lexical problem but a documented, specific cultural-collision problem (kulin polygamy custom); a vague/softened rendering has real potential to be read as permission rather than prohibition.

5. ζήτησις/γενεαλογία / “controversies” and “genealogies” (Titus 3:9) — Direct naming-collision with Panjikaran, a currently-practiced, socially respected regional institution; risk that the text is heard as condemning genealogical record-keeping itself rather than Paul’s narrower target (speculative theological pedigree disputes).

6. σωτήρ applied to both Father and Son (Titus 1:3–4; 2:10,13; 3:4,6) — Six occurrences establishing a Trinitarian pattern; risk that Maithili readers, whose devotional literature (Bhagavad Gītā 4.7–8) already contains a self-declared periodically-appearing divine-rescuer motif, absorb उद्धारकर्ता into that same cyclical-avatar-savior framework rather than recognizing a single historical Savior.

7. ἐπίσκοπος/πρεσβύτερος as one office, not two (Titus 1:5–7) — Structural ambiguity risk: using two unrelated-sounding Maithili terms (मण्डलीक प्राचीन / अध्यक्ष) without an explicit linking note could mislead readers into inferring a two-tier office structure absent from the text.

8. εὐσέβεια/ἀσέβεια coined pair (Titus 1:1; 2:12) — Genuine missing-vocabulary coinage carries first-use risk: absent the mandatory note, परमेश्वरनिष्ठा could be silently reabsorbed into general भक्ति usage by readers or future translators unfamiliar with this package’s specific fencing rationale.

9. αἱρετικὸν ἄνθρωπον / “divisive person” (Titus 3:10) — Risk of over-formalizing into an abstract heresy-trial register (if a translator reaches for विधर्मी) rather than preserving Paul’s relational/pastoral “habitual troublemaker” sense, which drives the specific two-step warn-then-separate process.

10. δούλους ἰδίοις δεσπόταις / household slaves and masters (Titus 2:9) — High cultural-sensitivity risk: without a substantial contextualizing note, this passage could be misapplied to endorse caste-based servitude or bonded labor in the contemporary setting, a misreading the text does not warrant but does not itself forestall.

11. ἀγάπη / “love” (Titus 2:2) — Risk of quiet absorption into प्रेम’s dominant regional connotation (Vidyapati’s Radha-Krishna erotic-devotional poetry) if the disambiguating note is dropped in abbreviated teaching materials.

12. ἐλπίς / “hope” (Titus 1:2; 2:13; 3:7) — Lower-probability but real risk of fatalistic assimilation toward प्रारब्ध/भाग्य-style destiny-language already flagged as a recurring hazard across this whole language package.

13. χρηστότης/φιλανθρωπία pairing (Titus 3:4) — Risk that φιλανθρωπία drifts toward परोपकार’s dharmic merit-generating-charity connotation if translated loosely rather than with मानव-प्रेम’s specific God-as-subject framing.

14. σωφροσύνη-family self-control terms (Titus 1:8; 2:2,4,5,6,12) — Recurring six times; cumulative risk that repeated exposure without the accompanying note normalizes संयम toward tapasya-style ascetic achievement rather than grace-enabled fruit.

15. δίκαιος/ὅσιος pairing (Titus 1:8) — Lowest-ranked Critical-adjacent item: risk is narrow (a single elder-qualification verse) and mitigated by both words already resolving to previously-fenced roots (धार्मिक, सदाचारी), but flagged for completeness since it is the letter’s only occurrence of ὅσιος.

---

5. Summary Table: Gap Type by Doctrine

Doctrine	Primary gap type	Chapters engaged
Grace That Trains for Godly Living	Missing vocabulary (coinage required: training, godliness, ungodliness)	2
Qualifications for Elders	Crowded neighborhood (elder/office vs. age/community) + cultural-collision pragmatics (husband of one wife)	1
Sound Doctrine and Good Works	Missing vocabulary (good works, avoiding कर्म-root) + metaphor-preservation risk (sound/healthy)	1, 2, 3
Salvation by Grace not Works	Crowded neighborhood (grace vs. mercy; Savior vs. त्राता) + syntactic-scope ambiguity (3:5’s negation)	2, 3
Regeneration by the Holy Spirit	Missing vocabulary (regeneration — single highest-risk coinage in the book)	3
Submission to Authority	Crowded neighborhood (दास/सेवक register split) + cultural-sensitivity contextualization	2, 3
Avoiding Divisive Controversies	Naming-collision fencing (genealogies/Panjikaran) + relational vs. classificatory register (divisive person)	3

All three chapters of Titus are represented; Titus 3:12–15 is confirmed reviewed with no additional doctrinal vocabulary beyond the transliterated proper names already logged in Section 3 of 08_core_glossary.md.

This document feeds Phase 1 Step 9 (semantic analysis) and the Titus additions to doctrine_risk_registry.json; it does not itself alter any baseline Romans rendering.