Linguistic Gap Analysis: James — English → Odia

Purpose and Method

This analysis identifies where the Odia language’s existing theological, devotional, and everyday vocabulary is sufficient, missing, or dangerously crowded for the nine Bible Doctrines assigned to the James curriculum. It extends — and must never contradict — the established Romans translation_memory.json and its Odia religious-landscape findings (Jagannath/Puri temple culture, Odia Vaishnav bhakti tradition, Panchasakha devotional literature, Shakta goddess tradition, and popular Hindu rebirth/karma cosmology).

James presents a distinct linguistic-gap profile from Romans: where Romans’s sharpest risks cluster around Christology and soteriology (incarnation, resurrection, lordship, justification), James’s sharpest risks cluster around ethics-as-evidence vocabulary (faith/works), wisdom epistemology, social-economic justice language, spirit-world vocabulary (devil/demons vs. folk ଭୂତ), and a second, independent collision with the Hindu ritual-penance system (prāyaścitta) at the confession/restoration doctrine — a collision Romans never had to negotiate.

Findings here directly inform analysis/07_semantic_analysis.md and analysis/08_core_glossary.md, and must be reconciled into the version-incremented translation_memory.json before Phase 2 begins.

---

Section 1: Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

1. Faith and Works

Element	Detail
Key English terms	faith, works, dead faith, justified, cooperated, made complete, friend of God
Available Odia terms	ବିଶ୍ୱାସ (biśwāsa, faith — REUSED, sufficient); କର୍ମ (karma — available but loaded); ଧାର୍ମିକ ବୋଲି ଗଣା ହେବା (justification compound — REUSED, extendable to verb forms)
Weaknesses	(1) କର୍ମ is the single most theologically dangerous available word in this doctrine: in everyday Odia religious speech it default-activates the Hindu karma-phala framework (moral/ritual action generating merit that determines rebirth outcome), and it is also the word used for the hereditary ritual-service duties (seba karma) of Puri temple functionaries. (2) Odia has no native verb that cleanly distinguishes “declared righteous” (forensic) from “shown/proved righteous” (evidentiary) — both senses collapse onto the same compound ଧାର୍ମିକ ବୋଲି ଗଣା ହେବା, creating an internal Romans-vs-James consistency risk rather than an external syncretism risk. (3) ସିଦ୍ଧ (siddha), the most natural-sounding Odia candidate for “made complete/perfected,” is pre-loaded with the yogic “accomplished adept” sense (siddhi attained through disciplined practice) and must be excluded.
Recommended strategy	Retain କର୍ମ but NEVER let it stand unqualified in doctrinally load-bearing sentences — pair it contextually with biśwāsa-governed clauses (“faith that produces କର୍ମ”) rather than allowing a bare “salvation by କର୍ମ” construction to appear, even negated, without the surrounding faith-frame in the same sentence. Use ସହଯୋଗ କରୁଥିଲା (cooperated) rather than any merit-additive verb for 2:22. Use ସମ୍ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ ହେଲା, never ସିଦ୍ଧ, for teleioō. For the justification verb-form, MANDATE the theologian’s translator-note at every occurrence in 2:14-26 (already required in the registry) rather than attempting a lexical fix Odia does not possess.

2. Trials and the Testing of Faith

Element	Detail
Key English terms	trial/testing, endurance, perfect/mature, temptation/desire, double-minded
Available Odia terms	ପରୀକ୍ଷା (parīkṣā), ସ୍ଥିରତା (sthiratā), ସମ୍ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ (sampūrṇa), ପ୍ରଲୋଭନ/କାମନା, ଦ୍ୱିମନା
Weaknesses	ପରୀକ୍ଷା is a single Odia word doing double duty in English (both “trial” and “testing/examination,” as in a school exam) with no risk of religious collision — but it is dangerously close in register to the fatalistic explanatory frame (“ଏହା ଭାଗ୍ୟ, ପରୀକ୍ଷା ଆସିଛି” = “it’s fate, a test has come”) that already concerned the Romans baseline’s providence entry. James’s trials are purposive and God-permitted, not the impersonal churn of destiny.
Recommended strategy	Retain ପରୀକ୍ଷା / ପରୀକ୍ଷାର ଫଳ / ସ୍ଥିରତା as established. Add a standing instruction (see Section 4) that any sentence pairing ପରୀକ୍ଷା with an explicit divine agent/purpose clause (“ପରମେଶ୍ୱର ଆପଣା ଉଦ୍ଦେଶ୍ୟରେ…”) must not be trimmed for economy — the agent-and-purpose framing is what fences this term off from ଭାଗ୍ୟ.

3. Wisdom from Above

Element	Detail
Key English terms	wisdom, wisdom from above, earthly/natural wisdom, demonic wisdom
Available Odia terms	ଜ୍ଞାନ (jñāna) is the only serviceable Odia noun for “wisdom/knowledge”
Weaknesses	This is the single largest missing-vocabulary problem in the James curriculum. Odia possesses no word for “wisdom” that is not also the word for “knowledge/gnosis” in the technical Vedantic sense of jñāna-mārga — one of the three classical margas (paths) to mokṣa, understood as self-attained, liberating metaphysical insight into the nature of Atman/Brahman. James 3:13-17’s σοφία is the opposite kind of thing: God-given, prayer-requested (1:5), ethically fruit-bearing, relational wisdom for daily conduct — not a liberating gnosis a sage attains through contemplative discipline. There is no unused, uncontested Odia lexeme available to substitute.
Recommended strategy	Cannot avoid ଜ୍ଞାନ; must fence it structurally rather than lexically. (1) Never let ଜ୍ଞାନ stand alone in a doctrinally central sentence — always attach the “from above” / “God-given” qualifier, per the already-adopted compound ଊର୍ଦ୍ଧ୍ୱରୁ ଆସୁଥିବା ଜ୍ଞାନ. (2) Reinforce the earthly/demonic/from-above threefold contrast (3:15-17) in full every time it occurs, rather than abbreviating after first mention, since the contrast itself is the fence. (3) A translator’s note at 1:5 and 3:13 is recommended flagging the jñāna-mārga collision risk for reviewer awareness even though it is Medium/High rather than Critical, because the risk is pervasive rather than occasional.

4. Favoritism and the Poor

Element	Detail
Key English terms	favoritism/partiality, poor/rich, heir/kingdom, royal law, mercy, wages of laborers
Available Odia terms	ପକ୍ଷପାତ, ଗରିବ/ଧନୀ, ଉତ୍ତରାଧିକାରୀ, ରାଜକୀୟ ବ୍ୟବସ୍ଥା, ଦୟା, ମୂଲିଆଙ୍କ ମଜୁରି — all serviceable, none dangerously collision-prone at the lexical level
Weaknesses	The risk here is not lexical but illustrative/pastoral: Odisha’s own Ananda Bazaar tradition (open-air sale and shared eating of Jagannath’s mahaprasad at Puri, historically understood to dissolve caste distinctions at the moment of eating) is a genuinely attractive local analogy teachers will reach for, but it only dissolves caste boundaries — it has never dissolved economic boundaries (poor devotees still cannot afford premium prasad tiers) and the temple’s sanctum itself has historically excluded non-Hindus entirely. Using Ananda Bazaar as an uncritical “See, we already do this” illustration would blunt James’s more radical, no-remainder equality claim.
Recommended strategy	ପକ୍ଷପାତ, ଗରିବ/ଧନୀ, ଦୟା, etc. need no lexical fencing. Curriculum notes (not the glossary itself) should carry a standing caution, already partly present in the doctrine_risk_registry pattern, that any Ananda Bazaar comparison must explicitly name both the point of convergence (caste-crossing) and the point where James goes further (economic and religious-outsider inclusion). This is a teaching-material caution, not a translation-memory entry, but should be logged for Step 11 doctrine analysis.

5. Taming the Tongue

Element	Detail
Key English terms	tongue, bridle/tame, hell/Gehenna, bless/curse, likeness of God
Available Odia terms	ଜିଭ, ନିୟନ୍ତ୍ରଣ କରିବା/ଦମନ କରିବା, ନର୍କ, ଆଶୀର୍ବାଦ କରିବା/ଅଭିଶାପ ଦେବା, ପରମେଶ୍ୱରଙ୍କ ସାଦୃଶ୍ୟ
Weaknesses	ନର୍କ (naraka) is a genuine crowded semantic neighborhood term: in popular Odia Hindu cosmology naraka is one or more temporary purgatorial realms a soul passes through en route to its next rebirth, not a place of final, unrepeatable judgment. This is structurally the same category of risk the Romans baseline flagged for ପୁନର୍ଜନ୍ମ (reincarnation) versus ପୁନରୁତ୍ଥାନ (resurrection) — a superficially matching word masking an incompatible cosmology underneath.
Recommended strategy	Retain ନର୍କ as the conventional, already-established Indian-Bible rendering (a wholesale replacement would create larger downstream inconsistency across the wider Odia Bible tradition than it would solve), but MANDATE a clarifying footnote at James 3:6 distinguishing γέεννα’s finality from naraka’s popular-Hindu impermanence, per the existing bible_term_registry entry. This is a footnote-fencing strategy, not a lexical-substitution strategy.

6. Worldliness versus Friendship with God

Element	Detail
Key English terms	world, friendship with the world/with God, adulteresses (fig.), enmity with God, resist the devil, if the Lord wills
Available Odia terms	ଜଗତ (jagata) vs. ସଂସାର (saṁsāra) — a genuine two-candidate fork; ମିତ୍ରତା (mitratā) for friendship; ଶୟତାନ for the devil
Weaknesses	This doctrine contains the single most consequential lexical fork in the entire James curriculum. ସଂସାର is, if anything, the more natural, more literary Odia word for “the world” as an ethical-spiritual system — but it is precisely the Hindu technical term for the cycle of worldly bondage and rebirth from which mokṣa/mukti liberates, the same rebirth-cosmology concept the Romans baseline already excluded wholesale from salvation and resurrection. If a translator (or a well-meaning back-translator “improving” fluency) substitutes ସଂସାର for ଜଗତ anywhere in James 1:27, 3:6, or 4:4, James’s ethical either/or (loyalty to God vs. loyalty to a God-opposing social order) would silently reframe itself as a liberation-from-rebirth teaching — directly undermining the Romans baseline’s own resurrection/salvation firewall from the opposite direction. Separately, ଶୟତାନ/diabolos must not blur into the generic Odia folk-animist category of ଭୂତ (placated ancestral/nature spirits), which would reduce a personal, chief spiritual adversary to one more spirit among many to be managed ritually.
Recommended strategy	Elevate the ଜଗତ/ସଂସାର distinction to Critical-tier forbidden-substitution status in the updated translation_memory.json (already reflected in bible_term_registry.json; this should be copied verbatim into the forbidden-substitutions list of the AI Translation Requirements document, Step 12). Use ଶୟତାନକୁ ପ୍ରତିରୋଧ କର for 4:7, reserving ଭୂତ/ଭୂତପ୍ରେତ terminology only for the plural δαιμόνια of 2:19 where the distinction from folk spirits still needs its own explanatory note.

7. Prayer and Healing

Element	Detail
Key English terms	ask wrongly, elders of the church, anointing with oil, prayer of faith, save/heal, the Lord will raise up, pray for one another
Available Odia terms	ମଣ୍ଡଳୀର ପ୍ରାଚୀନମାନେ, ତେଲ ଲଗାଇ, ବିଶ୍ୱାସର ପ୍ରାର୍ଥନା, ସୁସ୍ଥ କରିବେ, ପ୍ରଭୁ ତାହାଙ୍କୁ ଉଠାଇବେ
Weaknesses	Two distinct collision risks converge in a single short passage (James 5:14-15): (1) “anointing with oil” superficially resembles abhisheka, the ritual anointing of a deity’s carved image performed daily as part of Jagannath temple worship — an association an urban Odia hearer with Vaishnav background will likely make instantly and unprompted; (2) σῴζω’s physical-healing sense at 5:15 uses the identical Greek root as the baseline’s Critical spiritual-salvation term, creating an internal English/Greek-transparency risk (a reader could wrongly import full soteriological weight into a healing-prayer verse, or conversely dilute 1:21/4:12/5:20’s spiritual sense by association).
Recommended strategy	For (1): render ତେଲ ଲଗାଇ as an action accompanying prayer (“ପ୍ରାର୍ଥନା କରି ତାହା ଉପରେ ତେଲ ଲଗାଇବେ”), with syntax that keeps prayer as the grammatical main action and oil-application as a subordinate accompanying clause — never let the oil-application stand as an independent verb governing the healing outcome, which would read as consecratory. For (2): retain ସୁସ୍ଥ କରିବେ (a physical-health-specific verb, not ପରିତ୍ରାଣ-family vocabulary) and require the mandatory translator’s note already logged in bible_term_registry.json at every occurrence of James 5:15.

8. Patience and the Lord’s Return

Element	Detail
Key English terms	patience, coming of the Lord, endurance, Lord of Hosts, compassionate/merciful, oath
Available Odia terms	ଧୈର୍ଯ୍ୟ, ପ୍ରଭୁଙ୍କ ଆଗମନ, ସ୍ଥିରତା, ସୈନ୍ୟାଧିପତି ପ୍ରଭୁ, ଅତି ଦୟାଳୁ/କରୁଣାମୟ, ଶପଥ
Weaknesses	ପ୍ରଭୁଙ୍କ ଆଗମନ (the Lord’s coming) is lexically safe, but James’s own illustrative frame (farmer awaiting the harvest, 5:7) sits in a cultural environment where the single most vivid, widely shared “a great one is coming/going in procession” mental image available to an Odia audience is Rath Yatra — the annual festival in which Jagannath, Balabhadra, and Subhadra process by chariot from the Puri temple to the Gundicha temple and back. This is a curriculum-illustration risk rather than a lexical one: Rath Yatra pictures a temporary, cyclical, round-trip journey of a deity who has already been resident and will return to the same fixed abode, which is the theological opposite of a once-inaugurated, still-future, non-repeating parousia.
Recommended strategy	No lexical change needed. Reinforce (already present in the Romans baseline’s AI Translation Requirements) the standing instruction to avoid Rath Yatra imagery when illustrating the parousia, and extend this instruction explicitly to James 5:7-8 curriculum materials, not only to Romans passages.

9. Confession and Restoration

Element	Detail
Key English terms	confess your trespasses, wander/turn back, save a soul from death, cover a multitude of sins
Available Odia terms	ପାପ ସ୍ୱୀକାର କର (compound built from REUSED ପାପ), ସତ୍ୟରୁ ବିପଥଗାମୀ ହେବା/ଫେରାଇ ଆଣିବା, ଆତ୍ମାକୁ ମୃତ୍ୟୁରୁ ରକ୍ଷା କରିବେ, ପାପ ଆଚ୍ଛାଦନ କରିବ
Weaknesses	This doctrine introduces the curriculum’s second independent Critical-tier collision, structurally unrelated to any Romans-baseline risk: James 5:16’s mutual, voluntary, grace-oriented confession among believers sits directly adjacent, in the target culture’s conceptual map, to prāyaścitta — the Hindu category of prescribed ritual penance performed (often through a priest or at a sacred site such as Puri itself) to burn off accumulated karmic debt from wrongdoing. Both concern “what to do after wrongdoing,” which makes the collision unusually easy for a hearer to reach for by analogy even without prompting. A second, related risk: ଆତ୍ମା (soul/psychē) must denote the whole person addressed by God, not the transmigrating jīvātman of rebirth doctrine that ଆତ୍ମା can otherwise carry in Odia religious registers generally (note: this is a softer echo of the same concern the Romans baseline raised for ପରମାତ୍ମା regarding the Holy Spirit, now recurring for the ordinary human soul).
Recommended strategy	Retain the compound phrase (never a single-word “confess”) and require the mandatory translator’s note already logged in the registry at every occurrence, explicitly naming the prāyaścitta contrast (mutual/relational/grace-based vs. ritual/technical/karma-erasing, and communal-among-equals vs. hierarchical/priest-administered). For ψυχή, prefer ଆତ୍ମାକୁ ମୃତ୍ୟୁରୁ ରକ୍ଷା କରିବେ as already adopted, and avoid any expanded paraphrase that would introduce a rebirth-adjacent term (e.g., ଜୀବାତ୍ମା) under any circumstance.

---

Section 2: Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

Missing Vocabulary (no adequate native Odia lexeme exists; compound/qualifier strategy required)

Concept	Problem	Strategy Adopted
Wisdom from above (σοφία ἄνωθεν)	No Odia word for “wisdom” exists outside the jñāna family, which is pre-loaded with Vedantic gnosis-path connotations	Mandatory compound ଊର୍ଦ୍ଧ୍ୱରୁ ଆସୁଥିବା ଜ୍ଞାନ; never bare ଜ୍ଞାନ in doctrinally central clauses
Works as faith’s evidentiary fruit (ἔργα)	Odia’s only serviceable noun, କର୍ମ, is the same word underlying karma-phala doctrine and seba temple-service duty	Structural fencing: always co-locate with faith-governing clauses; never a standalone “salvation by/through କର୍ମ” construction, even in negation
Made complete / matured (τελειόω)	The natural-sounding candidate ସିଦ୍ଧ names a yogic self-attained accomplishment	Use descriptive verb phrase ସମ୍ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ ହେଲା instead of a single evocative noun-based verb
Justification’s dual sense (forensic vs. evidentiary)	Odia has no distinct verb pair matching Paul’s δικαιόω (Romans, forensic) vs. James’s δικαιόω (evidentiary)	Cannot be solved lexically; solved procedurally via mandatory translator/theologian notes at every James 2:14-26 occurrence
Confession as mutual/relational (ἐξομολογέω)	No Odia phrase exists that is pre-fenced against prāyaścitta ritual-penance associations	Full compound phrase + mandatory contrastive translator’s note, never a single-word “confess”

Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (multiple existing Odia candidates compete; one must be fenced off)

Concept	Competing Candidates	Fence Applied
World / worldly system (κόσμος)	ଜଗତ vs. ସଂସାର	ସଂସାର forbidden outright (Critical); always ଜଗତ
Hell / final judgment (γέεννα)	ନର୍କ (only real candidate, but crowded by rebirth-purgatory sense)	Retain ନର୍କ, mandatory footnote distinguishing finality from cyclical purgation
Spiritual adversary / evil spirits (διάβολος, δαιμόνια)	ଶୟତାନ / ଭୂତପ୍ରେତ vs. generic folk ଭୂତ	Reserve ଶୟତାନ for the single personal adversary (4:7); use ଭୂତପ୍ରେତ/ମନ୍ଦ ଆତ୍ମା with explanatory note for 2:19, 3:15 — never plain folk ଭୂତ alone
God’s power/gift-language touching wisdom and works	ଜ୍ଞାନ, କର୍ମ, ଶକ୍ତି-adjacent vocabulary	All three separately fenced per entries above; ଶକ୍ତି itself remains excluded per Romans baseline for God’s power
Soul/self (ψυχή)	ଆତ୍ମା (also used loosely for Atman/jīvātman in general religious Odia usage)	Context-anchor every occurrence to “the whole person,” avoid any rebirth-adjacent elaboration
Religious observance / religion (θρησκεία)	ଧର୍ମ (crowded, caste-duty and seba-dharma associations) vs. qualified compound	Never bare ଧର୍ମ; always ଶୁଦ୍ଧ ଧର୍ମ (qualified), per existing registry entry

---

Section 3: Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term	Decision	Rationale
Gehenna/hell	Paraphrase-retain established word (ନର୍କ) + footnote	Wholesale transliteration (e.g., a Greek loanword) would break with established Odia Bible convention across the whole canon, not just James; footnote-fencing is more consistent with existing practice (cf. baseline’s treatment of ପ୍ରଭୁ vs. ଠାକୁର, a paraphrase-fence rather than transliteration solution)
Wisdom from above	Full descriptive paraphrase compound, no transliteration option	Greek σοφία has no established transliterated Odia Christian form (unlike “Messiah” or “Abba” in Romans); a paraphrase compound is the only viable route
Devil/Satan	Transliteration (ଶୟତାନ), already an established loanword in Odia via Perso-Arabic-influenced regional usage and other Indian Christian traditions	Transliteration here carries no local deity-name collision (unlike ପ୍ରଭୁ/ଠାକୁର) and is already the natural, widely recognized Odia word for the singular chief adversary
Demons (δαιμόνια, plural)	Paraphrase (ଭୂତପ୍ରେତ / ମନ୍ଦ ଆତ୍ମା) rather than transliteration	A transliterated “daimonia” would be unrecognizable to the reading-level target audience; paraphrase requires the accompanying fence-note against folk ଭୂତ conflation
Elders of the church (πρεσβύτεροι)	Paraphrase (ମଣ୍ଡଳୀର ପ୍ରାଚୀନମାନେ), not a transliterated ecclesial-office loanword	Consistent with baseline’s ମଣ୍ଡଳୀ; an office-title loanword risks importing denominational assumptions absent from James’s plain “elders”
James (author’s name)	Transliteration to established Bible form ଯାକୁବ	Standard Odia Bible practice for proper names, per Romans baseline convention
Confess (ἐξομολογέω)	Full descriptive paraphrase clause, not a single transliterated or single-word native term	Only a full clause can carry the mutual/relational/non-ritual framing needed to fence against prāyaścitta
Works (ἔργα)	Native word retained (କର୍ମ), not paraphrased away	No viable paraphrase exists that would not sound stilted or theologically evasive; retention plus structural fencing (Section 1) is the only workable path

---

Section 4: Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities in James

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × likelihood of unprompted cultural collision), for prioritized theologian review routing in Phase 2:

1. ଜଗତ vs. ସଂସାର (world, James 1:27; 3:6; 4:4) — Critical. The single highest-probability “silent substitution” risk in the whole curriculum: ସଂସାର is more literarily natural than ଜଗତ to many Odia ears, meaning a fluency-motivated correction by a well-intentioned reviewer is a live risk, not merely a first-draft risk. Directly undermines the Romans baseline’s own rebirth-cosmology firewall from a new angle.

2. ପାପ ସ୍ୱୀକାର / confession (James 5:16) vs. prāyaścitta — Critical. Unlike most collision risks in this Language Package (which involve a specific named ritual or deity), this collision is with an entire category of Hindu religious practice (ritual penance generally), making it harder to fence with a single forbidden word and dependent instead on mandatory explanatory notes at every occurrence.

3. ଜ୍ଞାନ / wisdom (James 1:5; 3:13-17) — High-to-Critical in practice. Unlike κόσμος, there is no unused alternative lexeme to retreat to; the entire fencing burden falls on compound-qualification and contrastive structure, which is easier to erode through paraphrase drift in translation or oral teaching than a clean forbidden-word rule.

4. କର୍ମ / works (James 2:14-26) — High. The core-passage term of the entire curriculum’s theological anchor (James 2:14-26); the risk is compounded by the fact that James’s own argument, taken out of its faith-cooperative frame, can sound like it is teaching exactly the karma-merit doctrine the word already carries — making internal-argument fidelity, not just word choice, the safeguard.

5. ଧାର୍ମିକ ବୋଲି ଗଣା ହେବା / justified (James 2:21, 24, 25) reconciled with Romans’ forensic sense — Critical, cross-curriculum. Because the identical Odia compound must serve two theologically distinct senses across two different curricula (Romans forensic, James evidentiary) studied by the same learners, inconsistent teaching here risks producing an apparent contradiction in the minds of Odia believers moving between the two curricula — arguably the paradigm’s single greatest cross-document consistency risk.

6. ତେଲ ଲଗାଇ / anointing with oil (James 5:14) — High. Sits inside a doctrine (Prayer and Healing) that is otherwise pastorally warm and low-risk, but the single ritual-gesture overlap with daily Jagannath-image abhisheka makes this passage disproportionately vulnerable to being reinterpreted through a temple-ritual lens if the surrounding grammar does not keep prayer clearly primary.

7. ନର୍କ / Gehenna (James 3:6) — High. A stable, established word carrying a structurally identical risk-pattern to the Romans baseline’s ପୁନର୍ଜନ୍ମ/ପୁନରୁତ୍ଥାନ collision, but here there is no alternative word to switch to — footnoting is the only lever available, making reviewer diligence (rather than lexical choice) the operative safeguard.

8. ସୁସ୍ଥ କରିବେ / heal (physical, James 5:15) vs. ପରିତ୍ରାଣ (salvation, spiritual) — High. An intra-book risk (the same Greek root, σῴζω, doing two different jobs sixteen verses apart from James 5:15 to the wider salvation vocabulary of 1:21, 4:12, 5:20) rather than an external syncretism risk, requiring careful semantic separation to avoid either over- or under-claiming in either direction.

9. ଶୟତାନ / ଭୂତପ୍ରେତ vs. folk ଭୂତ (James 2:19; 3:15; 4:7) — Medium-High. Real but more containable than items 1-8, since Odia already possesses a workable, non-folk-associated word (ଶୟତାନ) for the singular adversary; the residual risk is confined to the plural “demons” references.

10. ପ୍ରଭୁଙ୍କ ଆଗମନ / coming of the Lord (James 5:7-8) vs. Rath Yatra imagery — Medium. Primarily a curriculum-illustration risk rather than a translation-memory risk; containable through standing instruction already present in the Romans baseline’s AI Translation Requirements, now extended explicitly to James.

---

Section 5: Downstream Actions Required

1. Increment translation_memory.json to a new version incorporating every term in analysis/08_core_glossary.md, preserving all Romans-baseline entries unchanged.
2. Add ସଂସାର to the forbidden-substitution list in 12_ai_translation_requirements.md alongside the existing ମୋକ୍ଷ/ମୁକ୍ତି/ପୁନର୍ଜନ୍ମ/ଅବତାର/ଧର୍ମ/ଶକ୍ତି/ଠାକୁର list.
3. Add James-specific mandatory-translator-note triggers to the AI system prompt: justification (2:21/24/25), confession (5:16), wisdom from above (1:5; 3:13-17), anointing with oil (5:14), physical healing vs. salvation (5:15).
4. Flag James 2:14-26 (the curriculum’s core passage) for cross-referencing against Romans 3:28 and 4:2-5 in every theologian review packet, given Ranked Ambiguity #5 above.
5. Log the Ananda Bazaar illustration caution (Section 1, Doctrine 4) as a curriculum-writing note for Step 11 doctrine analysis, distinct from the translation-memory glossary itself.

This document must be read alongside analysis/07_semantic_analysis.md and analysis/08_core_glossary.md; together they form the complete Phase 1 linguistic foundation for the James curriculum’s translation_memory.json update.