Linguistic Gap Analysis
06 Linguistic Gap Analysis — Gospel of John → Manipuri
This document executes Phase 1 Step 8 of the TRI pipeline for the John curriculum. It extends, and must not contradict, the Romans baseline (translation_memory.json, bible_term_registry.json, doctrine_risk_registry.json) and builds directly on analysis/08_core_glossary.md and the John-extended assets/bible_term_registry.json. Its purpose is to name, precisely, where Manipuri (Meiteilon, Bengali script) has (a) genuine vocabulary gaps requiring paraphrase or coinage, and (b) crowded semantic neighborhoods where an existing word already carries strong competing associations from Sanamahism or Gaudiya Vaishnavism and must be deliberately fenced. Core passage John 3:1-21 (the New Birth) is the theological anchor of this analysis, not its scope boundary; the analysis spans John 1-21.
1. Method
For each of the nine named curriculum doctrines, this analysis inventories:
- What Manipuri vocabulary is currently available (reused baseline terms, or newly proposed terms from
08_core_glossary.md) - What weaknesses that vocabulary carries (gap, collision, or both)
- The recommended fencing/paraphrase/transliteration strategy
Terms are then cross-cut into two lists — missing vocabulary (no adequate native lexeme exists at all) and crowded semantic neighborhoods (a native lexeme exists but is already occupied by Sanamahi or Vaishnava meaning and requires explicit fencing). A transliteration-vs-paraphrase decision log follows, and the document closes with a ranked list of the curriculum’s highest-risk ambiguities.
Full-book coverage confirmation: all 21 chapters of John were reviewed for load-bearing vocabulary. Chapters contributing no new gap-analysis material beyond what is already captured below are listed in §6 as reviewed-but-non-contributory, per the PRD’s full-coverage mandate.
2. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix
| # | Doctrine | Available Manipuri Terms | Weaknesses | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The Deity and Pre-existence of Christ (the Word) | তেংবাং মপুগী ৱাহৈ (Word/Logos, new); অমা খক্তা ওইবা মচানুপা (only-begotten, new); স্বর্গদগী কুম্থরকপা (descend from heaven, new); মীওইগী মচানুপা (Son of Man, new); তেংবাং মপুগা মান্নবা (equal with God, new); তেংবাং মপু (God, baseline) | Genuine gap: Manipuri has no existing personal-title vocabulary for a pre-existent, divine “Word.” ৱাহৈ is a common noun (word/speech) pressed into a capitalized theological-title role, a stretch with no precedent in the language’s religious register. Collision: risk of assimilation to Śabda-Brahman, the Sanskrit-philosophical idea (present in Vaishnava-influenced elite reflection) that sound/word is itself ultimate divine reality — a monist, impersonal reading opposite to John’s personal, agentive Logos. | Retain তেংবাং মপুগী ৱাহৈ as a fixed compound (never bare ৱাহৈ), always capitalized in translator apparatus, with a mandatory recurring translator’s note at every occurrence in ch. 1 distinguishing the personal, agentive Word from Śabda-Brahman. Treat as part of the single “descent/avatāra collision cluster” (see §3.2). |
| 2 | The New Birth and Regeneration by the Spirit | অনৌবা পোকপা (new birth, new); থাওয়াই অসেংবাদগী পোকপা (born of the Spirit, new); ঈশিংদগী অমসুং থাওয়াই অসেংবাদগী পোকপা (born of water and Spirit, new); তেংবাং মপুগী মচা (children of God, new) | Collision (severe): the single nearest available lexical neighbor for “born again” is পুনর্জন্ম, rebirth/reincarnation, a live, well-understood category in both Sanamahi ancestral-spirit belief and Vaishnava/Hindu cosmology. Gap: Manipuri has no native construction carrying ἄνωθεν’s deliberate double sense (“again” + “from above”); Nicodemus’s own confusion in 3:4 is the very ambiguity a flat rendering would erase rather than dramatize. | অনৌবা পোকপা (a descriptive compound, “birth anew”) with পুনর্জন্ম placed on the permanent forbidden list (already established by baseline’s resurrection precedent). Mandatory translator’s note at every 3:3-8 occurrence explaining the ἄνωθεν wordplay and explicitly using Nicodemus’s confusion as the teaching hook. Water phrase (3:5) requires a second note marking water as sign, not ritual-purificatory cause. |
| 3 | Eternal Life through Faith in Christ | অতৈ লৈতবা হিংবা (eternal life, new); হিংবা (life, baseline-adjacent); থাজবা (faith, baseline); অহানবা (salvation, baseline) | Collision: মোক্ষ (liberation) and the devotee’s hoped-for eternal nearness to/absorption into Krishna in Vaikuntha/Goloka are both live, positively-valued aspirations for Manipuri Vaishnava readers, and “eternal life” is exactly the kind of phrase that invites assimilation to one of them. Gap: no native phrase distinguishes a relational, knowledge-based eternal life (John 17:3, “this is eternal life, that they know you”) from a liberative/absorptive end-state. | Retain অতৈ লৈতবা হিংবা as fixed compound; require John 17:3 be taught as the interpretive key for every other eternal-life occurrence, explicitly contrasting relational knowing with liberation/absorption. Never gloss with মোক্ষ under any circumstance. |
| 4 | God’s Love for the World | নুংশিবা (agapē, new); মালেম (world/kosmos, new) | Collision (severe): Manipuri has a rich, prestigious, currently-performed vocabulary of romantic-mystical devotional love (prema) embodied in Ras Lila’s Krishna-Radha imagery; নুংশিবা itself is the ordinary word for love/affection and does not automatically distinguish John’s self-giving, initiating agapē from prema’s mutual, romantic register. Secondary gap: মালেম’s dual sense (loved humanity vs. hostile world-system) has no single clean Manipuri equivalent; the same word must flex between opposite moral valences across 3:16 and 15:18-19. | নুংশিবা retained (no better native alternative exists) but require an explicit “unlike Ras Lila’s prema” contrastive teaching note at every occurrence in ch. 3, 13, 15, 17. For মালেম, require per-occurrence sense-disambiguation flags (loved-object vs. hostile-system) in the segment cache, per the existing baseline note. |
| 5 | Judgment and Belief/Unbelief | ৱায়েল (judgment, new); মমাং (light, new); অমম্বা (darkness, new); মানখিবা (perish, new); তেংবাং মপুগী অসাউবা (wrath of God, new) | Collision: ৱায়েল is the ordinary word for a customary clan-council (yumnak/lup) verdict and could also suggest a maibi’s oracular verdict in Lai Haraoba divination. মমাং (light) risks assimilation to Sanamahi’s Atiya Guru Sidaba primordial-light cosmology and to Ras Lila’s staged divine radiance. অসাউবা (wrath) risks being read as a capricious Umang Lai deity’s ritual-neglect anger, remediable by propitiatory offering — the opposite of John’s point that only faith resolves God’s wrath. | Fence ৱায়েল explicitly as God’s own righteous verdict, distinct from customary or oracular verdicts, at every 3:17-19; 5:22-30; 12:31,47-48 occurrence. Fence মমাং against both Sanamahi and Vaishnava light-associations at every occurrence, cross-referenced to the baseline’s parallel glory caution. Fence অসাউবা with an explicit “resolved by faith, not ritual” note at 3:36. |
| 6 | The Seven “I Am” Statements | ঐ…অসি (predicate I Am, new); ঐহাক ঐ অসি (absolute I Am, new); plus 7 image-terms (bread of life, light, door, good shepherd, resurrection and life, way/truth/life, true vine) | Grammatical gap (structural, not lexical): Manipuri has no exact equivalent to the Greek’s emphatic, unmarked absolute ἐγώ εἰμι construction that echoes Exodus 3:14 LXX; a plain rendering reads as an ordinary self-identifying clause. Cultural gaps: pastoral (good shepherd) and viticultural (true vine) imagery are agriculturally distant from Manipur’s rice-valley economy; বread (রুটি) is a loanword standing in for a non-staple food to preserve Passover/manna typology. | Mandatory translator’s note at every absolute-form occurrence (8:24,28,58; 13:19; 18:5-6,8) tying it to Exodus 3:14. Treat the seven predicate metaphors as a single connected unit requiring background teaching for shepherd/vine imagery (agrarian-substitution note), and require রুটি (not চাক) for bread-of-life to protect the manna typology. |
| 7 | The Holy Spirit as Counselor | পাংজিনবিরকপা থাওয়াই অসেংবা (Counselor/Paraclete, new); অচুম্বাগী থাওয়াই অসেংবা (Spirit of truth, new); থাওয়াই অসেংবা (Holy Spirit, baseline) | Collision (severe): bare থাওয়াই names the general Meitei spirit/soul category, extending in Sanamahi belief to ancestral spirits (Apokpa) and Umang Lai nature-deities; a maibi’s mediumistic channeling role during Lai Haraoba is the closest functional cultural parallel to “a spirit who comforts/advises,” making this the single highest-collision-risk pneumatological term in the curriculum. Gap: no existing Manipuri term captures “one called alongside to help/advocate” (paráklētos) as a distinct compound; পাংজিনবিরকপা থাওয়াই অসেংবা is a constructed compound, not an attested term. | অসেংবা must never be dropped, in any Paraclete-related compound, without exception. Require theologian confirmation of পাংজিনবিরকপা before Phase 2 deployment (currently PROVISIONAL). Mandatory contrastive note at every occurrence (14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7,13) distinguishing the personal, singular, Christ-sent Counselor from a maibi’s channeled Umang Lai communication. |
| 8 | Christ’s Substitutionary Death and Resurrection | হিংবা পীথোকপা (lay down life, new); তেংবাং মপুগী য়াওবী (Lamb of God, new); থাংজিনবা (lifted up, new); লিং (serpent, new); মপুং ফাউরে (“it is finished,” new); সিবদগী হিংজত-লকপা (resurrection, baseline) | Gap: sheep/lamb sacrifice is not a major traditional Meitei ritual-sacrifice category (Sanamahi sacrifice more typically involves fowl/pig/buffalo; Vaishnavism rejects animal sacrifice on ahimsā grounds) — there is no ready cultural bridge for “Lamb of God,” positive or negative. Collision (severe, Manipuri-specific): লিং (serpent) is the closest available word to describe the Numbers 21 bronze serpent, but Pakhangba, Sanamahi’s ancestral serpent-deity and the mythic marker of historic Meitei royal lineage, is a serpent held in positive veneration — the sharpest valence-inversion risk in the entire book. Secondary collision: থাংজিনবা (lifted up) risks assimilation to ceremonial processional raising of a deity’s image at Lai Haraoba or Ras Lila festival observance. | Require full OT Passover/Levitical background teaching for তেংবাং মপুগী য়াওবী at every occurrence (1:29,36; 19:36), since neither living tradition offers a ready bridge. Require dedicated, non-optional translator training (not just a note) on the Numbers 21 background at every occurrence of লিং (3:14) to prevent Pakhangba-honorific misreading — flag as the single most distinctively Manipuri risk in the curriculum. Fence থাংজিনবা against festival-processional imagery at 3:14; 8:28; 12:32,34. |
| 9 | Unity of the Father and the Son | ঐগা ইপাগা অমা ওইবি (I and the Father are one, new); ইপা ঐদগী হেন্না চাউই (Father greater than I, new); অমা ওইবা (that they may be one, new); ইপা (Father, baseline) | Collision: “unity” language risks two opposite misreadings — a bhakti-devotee’s aspiration toward mystical absorptive union with Krishna, and (in wider regional Hindu philosophical discourse) a monist Brahman-Atman identity concept. Both misread John’s ontological Trinitarian unity-in-distinction as either romantic-devotional merging or metaphysical non-duality. Structural tension: 10:30 (“I and the Father are one”) and 14:28 (“the Father is greater than I”) must be taught in tandem or one will be misheard as contradicting or collapsing the other — a genuine expository, not merely lexical, gap. | Require the two texts (10:30, 14:28) to always be cross-taught together, with an explicit “functional submission in mission, not unequal essence” framing note. Explicitly distinguish co-essential Trinitarian unity from both bhakti mystical union and Advaita-style non-dual identity at every occurrence, and extend the same distinction to 17:11,21-22’s believer-unity language, marking it as patterned-but-not-identical to the Father-Son ontological unity. |
3. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods
3.1 Genuine Vocabulary Gaps (no adequate native lexeme; paraphrase/coinage required)
These concepts have no existing Manipuri word or fixed phrase and require constructed descriptive compounds, all already provisionally proposed in 08_core_glossary.md:
| Concept | Gap Type | Proposed Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Logos/Word as personal divine title | No personal-title vocabulary exists for this category at all | Constructed compound তেংবাং মপুগী ৱাহৈ + mandatory note |
| ἄνωθεν’s double sense (again/from above) | No single Manipuri word or construction carries both senses simultaneously | Two-step paraphrase (অনৌবা পোকপা) + explicit dual-sense translator’s note |
| Absolute ἐγώ εἰμι (unmarked divine-name construction) | Manipuri grammar has no unmarked emphatic self-existence construction | Fixed rendering ঐহাক ঐ অসি + mandatory Exodus 3:14 cross-reference note at every occurrence |
| μονογενής (uniqueness-of-kind, not birth order) | No single word distinguishes “only of its kind” from “firstborn” or “only child” | Constructed descriptive compound অমা খক্তা ওইবা মচানুপা |
| Paraclete/Counselor as a distinct helping-office title | No attested Manipuri term for this specific relational office | Constructed compound পাংজিনবিরকপা থাওয়াই অসেংবা (PROVISIONAL, theologian confirmation required) |
| Formal declarative “it is finished” (completed, sufficient, non-repeatable) | No fixed liturgical/declarative phrase exists for a once-for-all completed transaction | Constructed phrase মপুং ফাউরে + explicit “no supplementation required” note |
| Lamb of God (as a specifically OT Passover/Levitical sacrificial image) | Sheep are not a major indigenous sacrificial animal in either living tradition | Retain descriptive compound তেংবাং মপুগী য়াওবী + mandatory OT background teaching (no shortcut available) |
3.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (existing term, competing associations — fencing required)
These concepts do have an available native or established loanword, but that word is already actively occupied by Sanamahi and/or Vaishnava meaning, and every occurrence requires explicit fencing (contrastive teaching notes), not merely glossary lookup:
| Manipuri Term | Doctrinal Use | Competing Occupant(s) | Fencing Requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| থাওয়াই (bare, without অসেংবা) | Holy Spirit / Counselor | General spirit/soul category; ancestral Apokpa spirits; Umang Lai nature-deities; maibi’s channeled spirit-communication | অসেংবা is non-negotiable in every compound; bare থাওয়াই is forbidden outright (baseline rule, reaffirmed) |
| স্বর্গ (heaven) | The Son’s origin/destination; believers’ future hope | Puranic/Vedic temporary heavenly realm within a rebirth cosmology; Vaishnava devotee’s Vaikuntha/Goloka aspiration | Mandatory distinguishing note at every occurrence (1:32,51; 3:13,27,31; 6:31-51); no clean native alternative exists, so fencing must be done entirely through recurring translator apparatus, not lexical substitution |
| স্বর্গদগী কুম্থরকপা / স্বর্গদা কাখৎপা (descend/ascend from heaven) | Christ’s pre-existence and unique incarnation | Sanskrit avatāra (literally “descent”) — Krishna’s periodic “coming down,” celebrated in Ras Lila | Single highest-density collision point in the whole book; must be taught as one unique, permanent, non-repeatable descent, cross-referenced at every occurrence in ch. 3, 6, 8, 12, 14, 18 as part of one connected doctrinal unit |
| লিং (serpent) | Numbers 21 typology pointing to the cross | Pakhangba, the positively-venerated ancestral serpent-deity and royal-lineage marker | See doctrine #8 above; single most Manipuri-specific risk in the curriculum |
| নুংশিবা (agapē love) | God’s self-giving love for the world; the new commandment | Ras Lila’s Radha-Krishna romantic-mystical prema, a prestigious, UNESCO-recognized, currently performed devotional practice | Mandatory contrastive note at every occurrence in ch. 3, 13, 14, 15, 17 |
| ৱায়েল (judgment) | God’s righteous verdict on belief/unbelief | Customary yumnak/lup clan-council verdicts; maibi oracular verdicts | Fence as divine, not customary or oracular, judgment |
| মমাং (light) | Christ as revealer and judge | Sanamahi’s Atiya Guru Sidaba primordial light; Ras Lila’s staged divine radiance | Fence at every occurrence, parallel to baseline’s glory caution |
| খুরুম্জবা (worship) | Exclusive worship of God/Christ | Ordinary respectful obeisance to elders, royalty, and deities generically (Vaishnava temple reverence, Umang Lai grove reverence) | Must be explicitly marked “exclusive worship” whenever directed at God/Christ (4:20-24; 9:38) |
| মালেম (world/kosmos) | Object of God’s love vs. hostile world-system | Risk of functioning as a specific tiered cosmological “middle-earth” plane in Meitei cosmology, narrowing κόσμος to a location | Per-occurrence sense-flag required (loved-object vs. hostile-system) |
| থাংজিনবা (lifted up) | The cross as the moment of the Son’s exaltation | Ceremonial processional raising of a deity’s image at Lai Haraoba or Ras Lila festival display | Fence against festival-display association at 3:14; 8:28; 12:32,34 |
| অসাউবা (wrath of God) | God’s holy judicial opposition to unbelief | Capricious Umang Lai deity’s ritual-neglect anger, remediable by propitiatory offering; Vaishnava prāyaścitta appeasement | Fence as resolved only by faith, never by ritual propitiation |
| স্বর্গগী য়াওবী framing for Lamb of God, sacrificial vocabulary generally | Christ’s substitutionary death | Sanamahi Lai Haraoba propitiatory offerings; Vaishnava prāyaścitta and ahimsā-based rejection of animal sacrifice | Requires full OT teaching; no bridging shortcut in either living tradition |
4. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decision Log
| Term | Decision | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Logos/Word | Paraphrase (descriptive compound তেংবাং মপুগী ৱাহৈ) | No Manipuri Christian transliteration tradition for “Logos” exists; a bare transliteration (e.g. “লোগোস”) would be theologically opaque to readers, while ৱাহৈ preserves a recognizable native root, provided it is fenced against Śabda-Brahman |
| Messiah / Christ | Transliteration (ক্রিস্তো, baseline-established) | Already fixed by baseline and by John’s own in-text gloss (1:41, 4:25); reused exactly, no change |
| Paraclete | Paraphrase (constructed compound, not transliteration) | “Paraclete” carries no recognition value for a Manipuri reader without Greek/theological training; a functional descriptive compound built on established sent/Spirit roots is more transparent, though it must be confirmed with a theologian before deployment |
| Abba | Transliteration retained (আব্বা, baseline) | Not directly attested in John’s own text but retained per baseline for cross-curriculum consistency; no John-specific decision required |
| Amen, Hallelujah (where they occur) | Transliteration (per baseline convention) | Established regional Christian liturgical transliteration; reused without change |
| Egō eimi (absolute) | Paraphrase with mandatory annotation, not transliteration | A transliterated Greek phrase would communicate nothing on its own to a Manipuri reader; the paraphrase ঐহাক ঐ অসি plus a required Exodus 3:14 cross-reference note carries the theological weight instead |
| Israel, David | Transliteration (baseline-established: ইস্রায়েল, দাউদ) | Reused exactly; proper names follow established Bible-translation convention |
| Lamb of God | Paraphrase (তেংবাং মপুগী য়াওবী), not transliteration of “amnos” | A transliterated Greek/English loanword would carry zero cultural content; the descriptive compound at least names a recognizable animal, though full OT background teaching remains required regardless |
| Rabbi/Rabbouni (John 1:38; 20:16) | Transliteration recommended (রব্বি/রব্বুনি) with a gloss | Preserves the address-title’s foreignness intentionally, since John himself glosses it in-text (“which means Teacher”) — the same technique used for Messiah; should not be replaced by a Manipuri honorific that might carry Vaishnava guru connotations |
| Hosanna (John 12:13) | Transliteration (হোসান্না) | Standard regional Bible-translation convention for untranslatable liturgical exclamations; no native equivalent attempted |
| Bread (in bread-of-life) | Loanword preferred over native equivalent (রুটি, not চাক) | চাক (rice), the true Manipuri dietary staple, would sever the manna/Passover-bread OT typology entirely; রুটি (a pan-Indic flatbread loanword) is the lesser distortion |
5. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities (John Curriculum)
Ranked by combined severity of doctrinal stakes and collision density with a live, currently-practiced tradition (not a historical footnote):
- Serpent typology (John 3:14, লিং vs. Pakhangba) — Critical. The single most Manipuri-specific risk in the entire Bible translation landscape surveyed to date: a positively-venerated ancestral serpent-deity directly inverting the OT judgment-image Christ invokes of himself.
- Descend/ascend from heaven vocabulary (ch. 3, 6, 8, 12, 14, 18) — Critical. Directly overlaps Sanskrit avatāra’s literal meaning (“descent”), the grammatical core of Krishna-avatar theology celebrated in the UNESCO-recognized Ras Lila.
- New birth / ἄνωθεν (John 3:3-8) — Critical. Nearest lexical neighbor is পুনর্জন্ম (rebirth/reincarnation), a live category in both traditions; this curriculum’s own core passage is its highest-density risk zone.
- Holy Spirit as Counselor / bare থাওয়াই (ch. 14-16) — Critical. Nearest functional cultural parallel is a maibi’s mediumistic channeling of an Umang Lai deity’s message during Lai Haraoba trance.
- Agapē love vs. Ras Lila prema (3:16; 13:1,34-35; 15:9-13; 17:23-26) — Critical. A prestigious, currently performed devotional-romantic love tradition sits directly adjacent to the same native word used for God’s self-giving love.
- Absolute “I am” (8:24,28,58; 13:19; 18:5-6,8) — Critical, but a grammatical/structural gap rather than a collision risk: Manipuri has no unmarked equivalent to the emphatic Exodus 3:14 echo, so the deity-claim can silently disappear without a mandatory note.
- Logos/Word (1:1-3,14) — Critical. Risk of assimilation to Śabda-Brahman philosophical monism, which would make Christ’s Word an impersonal ultimate-reality principle rather than a personal divine agent.
- Heaven / স্বর্গ (throughout, esp. ch. 3, 6) — Critical/High. A pan-Indic loanword with no clean native alternative, permanently double-booked with the Puranic rebirth-cosmology heavenly realm and the Vaishnava Vaikuntha/Goloka aspiration.
- Unity of Father and Son (10:30 vs. 14:28) — Critical. Risk of being heard through either a bhakti mystical-union lens or a monist Brahman-Atman lens; also an internal structural-tension risk if the two verses are not cross-taught.
- Wrath of God (3:36) — Critical/High. Risk of being reinterpreted as a capricious, ritually-appeasable Umang Lai/Vaishnava-style divine displeasure rather than a settled judicial verdict resolved only by faith.
- Lamb of God (1:29,36; 19:36) — High. Genuine cultural gap rather than collision: neither living tradition offers positive sacrificial-lamb imagery, so background teaching cannot piggyback on existing cultural knowledge at all.
- Judgment / ৱায়েল (3:17-19; 5:22-30) — High. Risk of assimilation to customary clan-council verdicts or maibi oracular pronouncements.
- Light / মমাং (1:4-9; 3:19-21; 8:12; 9:5) — High. Double collision risk (Sanamahi Atiya Guru Sidaba primordial light; Ras Lila staged radiance).
- World / মালেম dual sense (3:16 vs. 15:18-19) — High. Risk of the same word narrowing to a specific cosmological plane rather than flexing across John’s two intended senses.
- Overcome the world / martial-heroic framing (16:33) — Medium/High. Risk of assimilation to Thang-Ta warrior-hero cultural resonance associated with Sanamahi ancestor traditions, recasting a spiritual victory as martial conquest.
6. Full-Book Coverage Note
All 21 chapters of John were reviewed for this gap analysis. The following chapters/sections contain no additional load-bearing vocabulary beyond what is captured above and in 08_core_glossary.md, and are recorded here as reviewed, not omitted:
- John 2 (wedding at Cana, temple cleansing): reviewed; no new gap-analysis material beyond “sign” (§ covered in doctrine matrix row 6 support) and “glory” (baseline-reused).
- John 7, 9 (Feast of Tabernacles discourse; healing of the blind man): reviewed; vocabulary already captured under light/darkness, witness/testimony, and judgment entries above.
- John 19 (crucifixion narrative proper, excluding “it is finished” and Lamb of God already treated): reviewed; remaining vocabulary (governor, cross, execution terms) assessed as Low risk, standard narrative vocabulary with no comparative-religion collision identified.
- John 21 (post-resurrection epilogue): reviewed; “follow me” language already mapped to the baseline’s obedience_of_faith root; no new gap identified beyond what Table A of
08_core_glossary.mdrecords.
No chapter was found to be entirely without theological load; the above are chapters whose load-bearing terms are already fully accounted for elsewhere in this document and in the core glossary, and are listed here solely to satisfy the full-coverage mandate explicitly rather than by silent omission.
This document must be read alongside analysis/08_core_glossary.md, assets/bible_term_registry.json (John-extended), and the Romans baseline doctrine_risk_registry.json. All PROVISIONAL renderings flagged above require theologian or native-speaker confirmation before Phase 2 segment translation begins.