Linguistic Gap Analysis
Acts — Linguistic Gap Analysis (Phase 1, Step 8)
Source language: English (from Greek)
Destination language: Odia
Curriculum: Acts 1–28
Core passage: Acts 2:1–41 (Pentecost)
Builds on: 07_semantic_analysis.md, 08_core_glossary.md, assets/translation_memory.json (Romans baseline, v1), assets/bible_term_registry.json (Acts, v1)
0. Purpose and Method
This document performs the linguistic gap analysis mandated by Phase 1 Step 8: for every doctrine in the Acts curriculum, it inventories what Odia vocabulary is available, states precisely where that vocabulary is weak or dangerous, and recommends a strategy — reuse from the Romans baseline, new compound coinage, transliteration with gloss, or semantic fencing against a crowded neighbor term. It then separates two distinct kinds of risk that Phase 2 reviewers must handle differently:
- Missing vocabulary — concepts for which Odia has no existing natural term, requiring coinage or transliteration (the risk is comprehension/naturalness).
- Crowded semantic neighborhoods — concepts for which Odia has several existing terms, at least one of which is a strong false friend rooted in Odisha’s dominant Jagannath-Vaishnav devotional culture, Shakta goddess tradition, or folk/occult practice (the risk is syncretism/doctrinal collision).
Acts is structurally different from Romans: it is narrative, not epistle, and its centre of gravity — the Spirit’s visible, public, first-time outpouring at Pentecost, plus miracle, magic, possession, idol, and vow vocabulary recurring throughout the travel narratives — multiplies the number of crowded neighborhoods well beyond what Romans required. This document is therefore weighted toward neighborhood-fencing analysis.
All risk tiers below follow the baseline convention: Critical (theologian review, every occurrence) / High (theologian review) / Medium (native speaker review) / Low (automated review).
1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix
1.1 The Holy Spirit and Pentecost
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | ପବିତ୍ର ଆତ୍ମା (reused, Critical); new Acts-specific compounds: ପେଣ୍ଟିକଷ୍ଟ, ଅଗ୍ନି ପରି ଜିଭ, ପବିତ୍ର ଆତ୍ମାରେ ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ ହେବା, ଅନ୍ୟ ଭାଷାରେ କହିବା, ଢାଳିବା, ଶେଷ କାଳ |
| Weaknesses | (a) “Filling” and “tongues” vocabulary sits directly beside a live regional phenomenology of trance/possession (village deity-festival possession, ojha oracular trance) that Odia already has ready-made vocabulary for — the danger is not absence of words but presence of the wrong ones. (b) “Pour out” (ἐκχέω) collides with Snana Yatra’s ritual pouring of liquids over Jagannath’s image. (c) “Last days” collides with yuga-cycle cosmology and, concretely, with Nabakalebara’s periodic renewal pattern. |
| Recommended strategy | Retain baseline ପବିତ୍ର ଆତ୍ମା without variation. For the four new compounds, require a standing translator note distinguishing: (1) willing, coherent, message-bearing filling vs. involuntary trance-possession; (2) real intelligible foreign languages vs. ecstatic unintelligible utterance; (3) God’s own self-giving outpouring vs. ritual liquid poured on an object; (4) linear, unrepeated eschatological era vs. cyclical renewal. Fence, do not create new words. |
1.2 The Gospel to Jews and Gentiles
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | ସୁସମାଚାର (reused, High); ଅନ୍ୟଜାତି (reused, Medium); ଇସ୍ରାଏଲ (reused, Medium); new: ପରମେଶ୍ୱର ପକ୍ଷପାତ କରନ୍ତି ନାହିଁ, ଅଶୁଚି/ଅପବିତ୍ର, ମୂର୍ତ୍ତିପୂଜାରେ ବଳିଦିଆ ଖାଦ୍ୟ |
| Weaknesses | Acts pushes this doctrine past Romans’ abstraction into concrete food-purity case law (Peter’s vision, Acts 10; the Jerusalem Council, Acts 15) that maps with unusual precision onto Odisha’s own temple food-purity system and mahaprasad/bhoga commensality practice. There is no existing neutral Odia vocabulary for “food ritually offered to an idol” that does not either (a) sound clinical/foreign or (b) risk sounding like a direct polemic against mahaprasad specifically. |
| Recommended strategy | Keep the compound descriptive phrase ମୂର୍ତ୍ତିପୂଙ୍କାରେ ବଳିଦିଆ ଖାଦ୍ୟ (as recorded) rather than a single loanword; require every occurrence to carry a translator note referencing, but not naming, the Ananda Bazaar parallel already logged in the Romans baseline (14:1–15:7 notes) — teach the structural parallel without appearing to attack a named local practice directly in-text. |
1.3 Repentance and Baptism
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | New: ମନ ପରିବର୍ତ୍ତନ କରନ୍ତୁ (repent), ବାପ୍ତିସ୍ମ (baptize, transliteration retained), ପାପର କ୍ଷମା, ହୃଦୟ ବିଦୀର୍ଣ୍ଣ ହେବା |
| Weaknesses | Odia has an existing, very natural word for “turn/change” (ପରିବର୍ତ୍ତନ) but the ritual neighbor term ପ୍ରାୟଶ୍ଚିତ୍ତ (expiation/penance to offset karma) is closer in register to what an average hearer expects “repentance” to mean religiously. Similarly ସ୍ନାନ (ritual bathing) is the obvious, natural-sounding word for “immersion in water,” but it is saturated with Snana Yatra and river/tank ritual-bathing associations. |
| Recommended strategy | ମନ ପରିବର୍ତ୍ତନ (compound, not single word) explicitly fences against ପ୍ରାୟଶ୍ଚିତ୍ତ. ବାପ୍ତିସ୍ମ is retained as a transliteration precisely because every natural Odia paraphrase route leads back to ସ୍ନାନ; the loanword is the safer choice here, opposite to the general preference for native vocabulary elsewhere. This is the clearest transliteration-over-paraphrase decision in the whole curriculum (see §4). |
1.4 The Church as Community
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | ମଣ୍ଡଳୀ (reused, Medium); new: ପରିଚର୍ଯ୍ୟା, ରୁଟି ଭାଙ୍ଗିବା, ସମସ୍ତ ବିଷୟ ସାମୂହିକ ଭାବରେ ରଖିବା, ମିଶାଇ ଦିଆଗଲେ, ପ୍ରାଚୀନ, ଅଧ୍ୟକ୍ଷ, ପାଳକ |
| Weaknesses | (a) ἐκκλησία itself is used in Acts 19 for a purely secular riot-assembly — the identical Greek word requires opposite Odia renderings depending on referent, a disambiguation risk Romans never raised. (b) “Elder” (πρεσβύτερος) sits beside Odia village/caste panchayat elder-councils, whose authority is inherited/caste-linked rather than spiritually qualified. (c) “Service/deacon” sits beside the hereditary seba roles of Puri temple functionaries. |
| Recommended strategy | Enforce the ἐκκλησία disambiguation rule from 08_core_glossary.md §3.2 as a hard rule, not a stylistic preference: ମଣ୍ଡଳୀ only for the believing community; ସଭା/ମହାସଭା for the Ephesian civic assembly. For elder/deacon terms, require a short native-speaker-reviewed gloss on first use in each lesson distinguishing spiritual office from hereditary/caste office. |
1.5 Apostolic Authority and Miracles
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | ପ୍ରେରିତ (reused, Medium); ପରମେଶ୍ୱରଙ୍କ ସାମର୍ଥ୍ୟ (reused, High); new: ଆଶ୍ଚର୍ଯ୍ୟ କାର୍ଯ୍ୟ ଓ ଚିହ୍ନ, ମାୟା/ଯାଦୁ, ଗଣନା ଆତ୍ମା/ଭୂତ ଆତ୍ମା, ଯୀଶୁଙ୍କ ନାମ, ହାତ ଥୋଇବା |
| Weaknesses | This is the single most crowded neighborhood in Acts. Odia has rich, ready vocabulary for guru/sadhu siddhi (yogic-attainment power), camatkāra (holy-man miracle-show hagiography), tantra-mantra occult practice, ojha exorcism, and oracular possession — all pre-existing frameworks a hearer will unconsciously reach for when told “the apostles worked signs and wonders” or “Paul cast out a spirit of divination.” There is no single Odia word that is doctrinally neutral for “miracle” the way “signs and wonders” needs to be. |
| Recommended strategy | Never use a single-word “miracle” gloss; always keep the paired compound ଆଶ୍ଚର୍ଯ୍ୟ କାର୍ଯ୍ୟ ଓ ଚିହ୍ନ so the phrase reads as God’s own authenticating acts pointing to a message, not personal spiritual attainment. Every occurrence of ମାୟା/ଯାଦୁ and ଗଣନା ଆତ୍ମା/ଭୂତ ଆତ୍ମା requires theologian review with an explicit contrast note against the Holy Spirit’s action. |
1.6 Persecution and Bold Witness
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | New: ସାକ୍ଷୀ, ନିର୍ଭୀକତା, ତାଡ଼ନା ଦେବା/ଉତ୍ପୀଡ଼ନ କରିବା, ପ୍ରସ୍ତରାଘାତ କରିବା, ମନୁଷ୍ୟ ଅପେକ୍ଷା ପରମେଶ୍ୱରଙ୍କୁ ମାନିବା |
| Weaknesses | Low lexical-collision risk (no strong regional false friend competes with these terms), but a real register risk: ସାକ୍ଷୀ alone reads as neutral courtroom testimony in ordinary Odia usage and can lose the costly, life-risking sense the Acts narrative builds toward (culminating in Stephen and anticipating “martyr”). |
| Recommended strategy | No new coinage needed; the gap is one of emphasis, not vocabulary. Require translator notes at the first Acts occurrence (1:8) establishing that ସାକ୍ଷୀ in this book carries the weight that will later separate into the specific sense of “martyr,” and cross-reference every persecution narrative back to that note rather than re-explaining each time. |
1.7 Conversion of Paul
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | New: ମନୋନୀତ ପାତ୍ର; reused ପରମେଶ୍ୱରଙ୍କ ମନୋନୟନ (election, High); ତାଡ଼ନା ଦେବା |
| Weaknesses | Minimal direct collision risk; the primary risk is doctrinal rather than lexical — ensuring “chosen instrument” reads as sovereign personal choice, not fate (ଭାଗ୍ୟ), consistent with the baseline’s existing caution on election language. |
| Recommended strategy | Reuse the baseline election framing exactly; no new vocabulary category is needed beyond what 08_core_glossary.md already proposes (ମନୋନୀତ ପାତ୍ର). |
1.8 Justification apart from the Law
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | ଧାର୍ମିକତା, ଧାର୍ମିକ ବୋଲି ଗଣା ଯିବା, ବ୍ୟବସ୍ଥା (all reused, Critical/Critical/High); new: ସୁନ୍ନତ, ଯୁଆଳି/ବନ୍ଧନ, ବିବେକ, ଅନନ୍ତ ଜୀବନ |
| Weaknesses | (a) Acts 13:39 and Acts 15 require the exact Romans-baseline compound for justification to be reused verbatim — any drift here would fracture cross-document consistency on the curriculum’s single most theologically load-bearing phrase. (b) ସୁନ୍ନତ (circumcision) carries a strong everyday association with Islamic practice in contemporary Odia usage, which may distract from its OT-covenantal meaning in Acts 15. (c) ଅନନ୍ତ ଜୀବନ must be fenced against ମୋକ୍ଷ/ମୁକ୍ତି exactly as ପରିତ୍ରାଣ already is in the baseline. |
| Recommended strategy | Verbatim reuse for ଧାର୍ମିକତା/ଧାର୍ମିକ ବୋଲି ଗଣା ଯିବା — no deviation permitted. Flag ସୁନ୍ନତ for native-speaker confirmation of current Odia Bible tradition usage (per bible_term_registry.json note) before Phase 2 begins. Extend the Critical “never ମୋକ୍ଷ/ମୁକ୍ତି” rule explicitly to ଅନନ୍ତ ଜୀବନ in validation rules. |
1.9 The Great Commission Fulfilled
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Available Odia terms | ପରମେଶ୍ୱରଙ୍କ ରାଜ୍ୟ, ମିଶନ/ସୁସମାଚାର ପ୍ରଚାର (reused, Medium/Medium); new: ପଥ, ପନ୍ଥ, ଦେବତାମାନେ, ଦେବୀ, ଜୀବିତ ପରମେଶ୍ୱର, ପ୍ରତିମା, ଅଜ୍ଞାତ ପରମେଶ୍ୱର, ଅଜ୍ଞତା, ବିନା ବାଧାରେ |
| Weaknesses | This doctrine carries the curriculum’s densest cluster of idol/polytheism vocabulary (Lystra, Athens, Ephesus narratives), each with a live regional analogue: multiple named deities and deity-triads, goddess devotion, and image-veneration practice. It also carries the “Way” self-designation problem: the natural-sounding word ମାର୍ଗ actively frames Christianity as one path among several (bhakti-mārga, jñāna-mārga), the opposite of Acts’ exclusivity claim. |
| Recommended strategy | ପଥ over ମାର୍ଗ for “the Way” (fencing decision, see §3). ପ୍ରତିମା over ମୂର୍ତ୍ତି for “idol” (fencing decision, see §3). ପନ୍ଥ retained with a clarifying phrase for “sect,” paired with the baseline’s caution about Mahima Dharma structural parallels. Require theologian sign-off on every idol/deity/goddess occurrence. |
2. Missing Vocabulary (True Gaps)
These are concepts for which Odia has no pre-existing single word; the strategy is compound coinage or transliteration, and the primary risk is comprehension, not syncretism.
| Concept | Gap type | Proposed Odia form | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pentecost (as a named, unrepeated salvation-historical event, not merely “fiftieth day”) | No native equivalent name | ପେଣ୍ଟିକଷ୍ଟ (ପେଣ୍ଟିକଷ୍ଟ ପର୍ବ on first use) | Transliteration + gloss; do not substitute a generic “festival” word, which would flatten the event into a recurring seasonal observance. |
| Justification (forensic legal declaration, as opposed to moral transformation) | No single-word equivalent in any register | ଧାର୍ମିକ ବୋଲି ଗଣା ଯିବା (already fixed in baseline) | Confirmed gap; compound phrase is mandatory, verified again here for Acts 13:39. |
| ”The Way” as an exclusive self-designation (not “a way”) | Structural gap — Odia religious vocabulary defaults to plural-path framing | ପଥ, with mandatory translator note on first use (9:2) | See §3.3 below; this is fencing plus a genuine naming gap, since no existing single word carries “the one exclusive way” sense without modification. |
| Chosen instrument (σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς — literally “vessel of election”) | No idiomatic Odia equivalent for “vessel” in this personal-instrumental sense | ମନୋନୀତ ପାତ୍ର | Compound retained; ପାତ୍ର alone (vessel/container) would sound oddly literal without ମନୋନୀତ. |
| Restoration of all things (ἀποκατάστασις) | No existing eschatological-restoration vocabulary distinct from cyclical renewal concepts | ସମସ୍ତ ବିଷୟର ପୁନଃସ୍ଥାପନ | Compound coinage; must be taught alongside ଶେଷ କାଳ as part of a single linear-eschatology cluster. |
| God’s determined plan and foreknowledge (βουλὴ καὶ πρόγνωσις) | No compact native phrase | ପରମେଶ୍ୱରଙ୍କ ସ୍ଥିରୀକୃତ ମନ୍ତ୍ରଣା ଓ ପୂର୍ବଜ୍ଞାନ | Long compound is unavoidable; teach as extension of baseline Providence doctrine rather than as a wholly new concept. |
3. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing
Unlike §2, these are concepts where Odia vocabulary is abundant — the danger is picking the wrong neighbor, not having no word at all. Each entry below names the safe term, the dangerous neighbor(s), and the specific fence required.
3.1 ପ୍ରଭୁ vs. ଠାକୁର (Lord) — carried forward from baseline, sharpened by Acts 2:21,36
Already Critical in the baseline. Acts sharpens the risk because Acts 2:21’s “call on the name of the Lord” and Acts 2:36’s climactic Pentecost-sermon confession are the direct textual ancestor of Romans 10:9,13. Any inconsistency between how Acts and Romans render this clause would be a curriculum-breaking cross-document failure, not merely a local error. Fence: verbatim identical rendering across both curricula, enforced as a hard consistency rule.
3.2 ପ୍ରତିମା vs. ମୂର୍ତ୍ତି (idol) — new to Acts, Critical
ମୂର୍ତ୍ତି is the devotional, reverent term Odia Vaishnav worshippers use for Jagannath’s own sacred wooden images. Using it for εἴδωλον in Paul’s Areopagus polemic (17:16,23,29-30) or the Ephesian riot (19:26,35,37) would read as naming Jagannath’s images directly in a hostile theological argument. Fence: ପ୍ରତିମା only, theologian sign-off every occurrence, never ମୂର୍ତ୍ତି in this register.
3.3 ପଥ vs. ମାର୍ଗ (“the Way”) — new to Acts, High
ମାର୍ଗ is the natural, idiomatic Odia rendering of “way/path” — and precisely because it is natural, it activates the bhakti-mārga/jñāna-mārga/karma-mārga plural-paths framework embedded in regional religious vocabulary, which would make “the Way” sound like one valid option among several. Fence: ପଥ, with a mandatory translator note at first occurrence (9:2) stating this names the one, exclusive way of salvation.
3.4 ସାମର୍ଥ୍ୟ vs. ଶକ୍ତି (power of God) — carried forward, reinforced
ଶକ୍ତି names a specific divine-feminine power in Odisha’s prominent Shakta tradition (Samaleswari, Tarini). Acts intensifies exposure to this risk because miracle narratives are far denser here than in Romans. Fence: ସାମର୍ଥ୍ୟ only, no exceptions, including in miracle-narrative contexts where “power” appears repeatedly in close proximity (e.g., Acts 3–4).
3.5 ବାପ୍ତିସ୍ମ vs. ସ୍ନାନ (baptism) — new to Acts, Critical
ସ୍ନାନ is the natural word for “bathing” and is saturated with Snana Yatra ritual-bathing associations (ceremonial washing of Jagannath’s images) and general sacred-river/tank bathing practice. Fence: retain the transliterated loanword ବାପ୍ତିସ୍ମ; do not paraphrase into any native bathing/washing term, even when the English text uses ordinary “washed” language nearby (22:16).
3.6 ମନ ପରିବର୍ତ୍ତନ vs. ପ୍ରାୟଶ୍ଚିତ୍ତ (repentance) — new to Acts, Critical
ପ୍ରାୟଶ୍ଚିତ୍ତ is the standard Odia/Hindu term for ritual expiation performed to offset accumulated karmic guilt — a merit-transaction model precisely opposite to Spirit-enabled repentance granted through grace. Fence: ମନ ପରିବର୍ତ୍ତନ (compound phrase, never single-word ପରିବର୍ତ୍ତନ alone, which loses the moral-turning sense) at every occurrence (2:38; 3:19; 17:30; 26:20).
3.7 ପରିଚର୍ଯ୍ୟା / ଦାସ vs. ସେବା / ସେବକ (service, deacon, servant of God) — new to Acts, High
ସେବା/ସେବକ vocabulary is deeply anchored in the hereditary, caste-linked seba service roles of Jagannath temple functionaries (a lifelong, inherited, family-based office). Using it for either Christ’s servanthood (3:13,26) or the diaconal office (6:1-6) would suggest a similarly hereditary, caste-bound institution. Fence: ପରମେଶ୍ୱରଙ୍କ ଦାସ for Christ’s servant-title; ପରିଚର୍ଯ୍ୟା for the diaconal office; ସେବା/ସେବକ excluded from both.
3.8 ଗଣନା ଆତ୍ମା/ଭୂତ ଆତ୍ମା vs. ପବିତ୍ର ଆତ୍ମା (spirit of divination vs. Holy Spirit) — new to Acts, High
Both are grammatically “spirits” in Odia and appear in close narrative proximity in Acts 16 (Paul expels a divining spirit shortly after references to the Holy Spirit’s guidance). Odisha’s active oracular/possession folk-practice vocabulary supplies ready but doctrinally opposite neighbor terms. Fence: ensure lexical distance is visually and grammatically clear — ଗଣନା ଆତ୍ମା/ଭୂତ ଆତ୍ମା never abbreviated to bare ଆତ୍ମା, which would be visually indistinguishable from ପବିତ୍ର ଆତ୍ମା in short reference.
3.9 ମାୟା/ଯାଦୁ vs. ଆଶ୍ଚର୍ଯ୍ୟ କାର୍ଯ୍ୟ ଓ ଚିହ୍ନ (sorcery vs. signs and wonders) — new to Acts, High
Simon of Samaria (8:9-24) and Elymas (13:6-11) narratives place these two categories in direct narrative conflict; Odia rural religious vocabulary for tantra-mantra practice and ojha ritual is extensive and immediately available to a hearer’s mind. Fence: signs-and-wonders vocabulary must never share a root or a common descriptive frame with ମାୟା/ଯାଦୁ vocabulary; keep the apostolic miracle vocabulary anchored to ପରମେଶ୍ୱରଙ୍କ ସାମର୍ଥ୍ୟ, never to a generic “power” word shared with occult practice.
3.10 ଦେବତାମାନେ/ଦେବୀ vs. ପରମେଶ୍ୱର (gods/goddess vs. God) — new to Acts, High
Lystra (14:11-13) and Ephesus (19:27-35) narratives require plural-deity and goddess vocabulary to appear in the text at all (Paul and Barnabas are mistaken for Hermes and Zeus; Artemis is named) — this is unavoidable, unlike most other neighborhoods where the danger term can simply be excluded. Fence is therefore rhetorical rather than lexical: the surrounding narrative frame (Paul and Barnabas’s forceful refusal; the riot’s economic motive exposed) must be translated with full force so that the plural-deity vocabulary is clearly being narratively rejected, not neutrally described.
3.11 ମାନତ (vow) — new to Acts, Medium-High, not strictly fenced but flagged
ମାନତ (vow-making to Jagannath, typically merit/favor-transactional) is the only entry in this section where the same word is retained (there is no safer alternative) but must be accompanied by an explanatory note every time it appears (21:23-26), clarifying Paul’s action as missionary cultural accommodation, not endorsement of vow-for-favor religion.
3.12 ପନ୍ଥ (sect) vs. implied ମାର୍ଗ-style plural-path framing — new to Acts, High
ପନ୍ଥ structurally resembles Odisha’s own 19th-century Mahima Dharma (Alekh) movement — a recognized-but-distinct-from-mainstream religious path. Rendering “the Way” as merely a ପନ୍ଥ when Acts’ accusers use it dismissively (24:5,14) risks the reader accepting the accusers’ framing. Fence: pair ପନ୍ଥ with a clarifying phrase every time it is used of the accusation against “the Way,” making clear the term is quoted from hostile speech, not the narrator’s own theological classification.
4. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decision Log
| Term | Decision | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| ବାପ୍ତିସ୍ମ (baptism) | Transliterate | Every native paraphrase route (ସ୍ନାନ) leads directly into ritual-bathing collision; the loanword, though foreign-sounding, is doctrinally safer than any native alternative. |
| ପେଣ୍ଟିକଷ୍ଟ (Pentecost) | Transliterate + gloss on first use | No native word names this specific, unrepeated salvation-historical day without either genericizing it (“festival”) or wrongly localizing it. |
| ମସୀହା / ଖ୍ରୀଷ୍ଟ (Messiah/Christ) | Transliterate (carried from baseline) | Established Odia Christian convention; disambiguate titular vs. name-form per standing rule in 08_core_glossary.md §3.1. |
| ଖ୍ରୀଷ୍ଟିୟାନ୍ (Christian) | Transliterate, with native descriptive alternative ଖ୍ରୀଷ୍ଟିୟ ବିଶ୍ୱାସୀ available | Both forms recorded in registry; either is acceptable, but must be used consistently within a single document. |
| ପଥ (the Way) | Paraphrase, not transliterate | A native word is available and preferable once properly fenced against ମାର୍ଗ (§3.3); transliterating “Way” would be unnecessary and unnatural. |
| ମନ ପରିବର୍ତ୍ତନ (repent) | Paraphrase (compound), not transliterate | Native compound is available and theologically precise once fenced against ପ୍ରାୟଶ୍ଚିତ୍ତ (§3.6); no need for a loanword. |
| ପ୍ରତିମା (idol) | Paraphrase, not transliterate | Native word available and necessary once fenced against ମୂର୍ତ୍ତି (§3.2); a transliterated “idol”-loanword would be unfamiliar and less immediately clear to hearers. |
| ପନ୍ଥ (sect) | Paraphrase, retained as loanword-adjacent native term with clarifying phrase | Odia already has this exact word in live use (cf. Mahima Dharma); no transliteration needed, but a fencing gloss is mandatory (§3.12). |
| ଆବ୍ବା / ଆମେନ / ହାଲେଲୁୟା (carried from baseline) | Transliterate | Consistent with Romans baseline convention for Aramaic/Hebrew liturgical terms preserved untranslated. |
General rule derived from this log: transliteration is preferred specifically where every available native paraphrase is a stronger false friend than the foreign loanword itself (baptism, Pentecost); paraphrase is preferred everywhere a native compound can be adequately fenced against its dangerous neighbor through a translator note rather than through avoidance of native vocabulary altogether.
5. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities for Acts
Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × cultural-collision proximity × frequency in the core passage and book):
- “Filled with the Holy Spirit” / “speaking in other tongues” (Acts 2:4, core passage) — Critical/High cluster. The single highest-risk ambiguity in the curriculum: the Pentecost narrative’s central visible sign sits directly beside Odisha’s live trance/possession phenomenology. A mistranslation here would misrepresent the core passage’s central claim, not a peripheral one.
- “Call on the name of the Lord” (Acts 2:21) — cross-document consistency with Romans 10:13 — Critical. Any drift from the Romans baseline rendering breaks the curriculum’s single most important cross-document consistency rule and directly risks invoking ଠାକୁର/Jagannath by association if mishandled.
- ପ୍ରତିମା vs. ମୂର୍ତ୍ତି (idol vocabulary, Acts 14, 17, 19) — Critical. Not present at all in Romans; a wrong choice here would read as a direct, named attack on Jagannath’s sacred images rather than a general polemic against idolatry.
- ମାନ ପରିବର୍ତ୍ତନ vs. ପ୍ରାୟଶ୍ଚିତ୍ତ (repentance, Acts 2:38, core passage) — Critical. Located inside the core passage itself; the apostolic altar-call’s very first command is at direct risk of being heard as a call to ritual expiation rather than Spirit-enabled turning.
- ବାପ୍ତିସ୍ମ vs. ସ୍ନାନ (baptism, Acts 2:38,41, core passage) — Critical. Also inside the core passage; if this word ever drifts toward a bathing-ritual register, the entire climax of the Pentecost sermon’s response is compromised.
- ପଥ vs. ମାର୍ଗ (“the Way,” Acts 9:2 and throughout) — High. Uniquely dangerous because the natural, idiomatic Odia word is the wrong one; translators must actively resist idiomatic instinct.
- ମାୟା/ଯାଦୁ and ଗଣନା ଆତ୍ମା vs. ଆଶ୍ଚର୍ଯ୍ୟ କାର୍ଯ୍ୟ ଓ ଚିହ୍ନ / ପବିତ୍ର ଆତ୍ମା (Simon Magus, Elymas, Philippian divining spirit) — High. Three separate narrative episodes each requiring the identical fence; cumulative risk if any one occurrence lapses.
- ଅଶୁଚି/ଅପବିତ୍ର and ମୂର୍ତ୍ତିପୂଜାରେ ବଳିଦିଆ ଖାଦ୍ୟ (Peter’s vision, Jerusalem Council food rulings, Acts 10, 15) — High. Direct structural parallel to Jagannath mahaprasad/bhoga practice; requires careful, non-inflammatory teaching notes rather than avoidance.
- ଦେବତାମାନେ/ଦେବୀ (Lystra, Ephesus) — High. Unlike most entries above, the dangerous vocabulary cannot be avoided (Artemis is named; Hermes/Zeus misidentification is narrated) — the risk must be managed rhetorically, not lexically.
- ପନ୍ଥ (“sect,” Acts 24:5,14) and ମାନତ (vow, Acts 21:23-26) — Medium-High. Lower narrative centrality than items 1–9 but structurally close enough to named Odisha religious movements/practices (Mahima Dharma; devotional vow-making) to require standing translator notes at every occurrence.
6. Summary of Required Follow-On Actions (feeding Phase 1 Step 2 / Phase 2 pre-flight)
- Merge all baseline-reused terms into
translation_memory.jsonwith no modification (Section 1 of08_core_glossary.md). - Add all 66 new Acts-specific terms from
08_core_glossary.md§2 totranslation_memory.jsonas version 2, each carrying the risk tier, rejected alternatives, and fencing note recorded in this document. - Extend the Romans baseline’s
12_ai_translation_requirements.mdFORBIDDEN SUBSTITUTIONS list with the Acts-specific additions: ସ୍ନାନ (for baptism), ପ୍ରାୟଶ୍ଚିତ୍ତ (for repentance), ମୂର୍ତ୍ତି (for idol), ମାର୍ଗ (for “the Way”), ସେବା/ସେବକ (for deacon/servant-of-God), ଗଣନା ଆତ୍ମା ambiguity guard against bare ଆତ୍ମା. - Extend the ἐκκλησία disambiguation rule and the Χριστός title/name disambiguation rule into the doctrine risk registry as standing cross-reference notes (already logged in
08_core_glossary.md§3). - Route every occurrence of the ten ranked ambiguities in §5 to human theologian review in Phase 2 Step 17, regardless of the term’s individually assigned risk tier where a cluster effect (§3.6–3.10) is present.
This document is the required input to Phase 1 Step 9 (doctrine risk registry finalization) and to Phase 2 pre-flight loading once translation_memory.json and bible_term_registry.json are updated to version 2 for the Acts curriculum.