Linguistic Gap Analysis
Linguistic Gap Analysis — The Gospel of Mark (English → Pashto)
Method Note
This analysis surveys Mark 1–16 in full against the established Romans translation_memory.json / bible_term_registry.json (the language authority) to identify (a) doctrine vocabulary already inherited from Romans and its adequacy for Mark’s narrative genre, (b) genuinely missing vocabulary with no ready Pashto equivalent, (c) “crowded” semantic neighborhoods where multiple candidate Pashto words compete and must be deliberately fenced apart, (d) transliteration-vs-paraphrase calls for the book’s several Aramaic/Hebrew items, and (e) a ranked list of this Gospel’s highest-risk ambiguities. No baseline rendering is altered here; this document extends the baseline into Mark’s narrative-Gospel register, which differs from Romans’ epistolary-argumentative register in ways that create new risks (action verbs, exorcism narrative, irony, apocalyptic imagery, oral-performance cues) not present in Paul’s letters.
Every chapter of Mark (1–16) has been surveyed. Chapters producing no new terms or doctrine risk beyond what is already tabulated are explicitly noted in the Coverage Statement (§6) rather than silently omitted.
1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix
| Doctrine (per curriculum) | Available Pashto Term(s) | Weaknesses of Available Term(s) | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jesus as the Suffering Servant and Son of God | د خدای زوی (Son of God, baseline Critical); د انسان زوی (Son of Man, new Critical); خدمتګار / غلام (servant vocabulary) | د خدای زوی collides with Qur’an 112:3/19:35 denial of literal divine sonship. د انسان زوی risks being heard as confirming the Quranic “merely human prophet” reading rather than importing Daniel 7’s exalted-judge sense, since Pashto has no independent literary tradition carrying that apocalyptic freight. No single Pashto phrase natively fuses “exalted heavenly figure” + “suffering servant” — this fusion is Mark’s own theological innovation and must be taught, not found ready-made. | Retain both titles exactly as fixed in baseline/glossary (د خدای زوی; د انسان زوی). At every Son of Man occurrence, actively teach the double referent (Daniel 7 authority + Isaiah 53 suffering) rather than relying on the phrase alone to carry it. Use Isaiah 53 “suffering servant” background material (via a footnote/teaching note, not a single lexical item) to bridge into 10:45. |
| The Kingdom of God Breaking In | د خدای پاچاهي (baseline Medium) | Adequate lexically, but Mark’s breaking-in-now inaugurated sense (1:15, “the time is fulfilled… the kingdom of God is at hand”) risks being flattened into a purely future/eschatological or purely past-political referent, especially given competing regional “Islamic Emirate” state-sovereignty rhetoric in living memory. | Reuse د خدای پاچاهي exactly (fixed per baseline). Require a consistent temporal marker (e.g., رانژدې شوې / “has drawn near”) at 1:15 across all lessons, and explicit teaching contrasting God’s present-and-advancing spiritual reign with any territorial-political state claim. |
| Faith and Discipleship amid Fear | ایمان (faith, baseline High); ویره/ويريدل (fear, new Medium) | ایمان’s shared Islamic six-pillars/creedal resonance persists from Romans. Mark’s distinctive contribution — faith and fear as narrative-dramatized opposites in the same pericopes (4:35-41; 5:21-43; 6:45-52) rather than argued abstractly — has no automatic lexical solution; the risk is stylistic flattening, not mistranslation of either word alone. | Reuse ایمان and ویره/ويريدل exactly. Mandate that translators preserve Mark’s juxtaposition structure (“why are you afraid? Have you still no faith?” 4:40) as an explicit paired unit in every occurrence, since the doctrine is carried by the narrative pairing, not by either term in isolation. |
| The Necessity of the Cross | پکار دی چې…ووزغمي (must-suffer, new Critical); صلیب / صلیب کول (cross, new Critical); رد کول (rejected, new Medium) | The entire cluster runs directly against the mainstream Sunni expectation (reinforced by Qur’an 4:157) that God would rescue, not abandon to suffering, a true prophet/Messiah. No Pashto phrase can neutralize this collision; it must be met head-on with explicit doctrinal teaching, not softened phrasing. | Reuse all three exactly as fixed in the glossary. Require oral/narrative apologetic supplementary material (named eyewitnesses: the women, the centurion, Joseph of Arimathea) alongside every occurrence of صلیب کول, given lower average literacy in the target readership. Never substitute a euphemism for “suffer/die” that would blunt the scandal Mark himself preserves. |
| Servanthood versus Worldly Greatness | خدمتګار (servant, new High); غلام (slave, new High); پر مخکې واکمني کول (lord over/dominate, new High) | Direct clash with Pashtunwali’s nang (honor) code and khan/servant tribal hierarchy, where voluntary servant status for a man of standing is actively shameful, not aspirational. غلام’s positive devotional ‘abd-of-God bridge does not extend to “slave of all people” (10:44), which has no ready cultural parallel at all. | Reuse خدمتګار / غلام / پر مخکې واکمني کول exactly. Teach 10:42-45 as a deliberate, explicit inversion of the honor-ranking default, not an incremental adjustment to it; flag 10:44’s “slave of all” as requiring the most explicit unpacking of any servanthood term in the book. |
| The Messianic Secret | تمثیل (parable, new Medium); رمز / پټ راز (mystery, new High) | Sufi asrar/ramz tradition frames hidden divine truth as earned through a pir-guided esoteric path; Mark 4:11’s “mystery” is a graciously given (δέδοται) disclosure to ordinary disciples, the opposite dynamic. Separately, the secrecy commands themselves (1:34, 1:44, 3:12, 8:30, 9:9) have no single recurring Pashto idiom in Mark’s narrative-refrain style and risk being smoothed into generic narrative color rather than tracked as a deliberate literary-theological device. | Reuse رمز/پټ راز exactly for 4:11 with the “gift, not earned initiation” correction taught explicitly. For the recurring silencing commands, adopt one fixed Pashto phrase (e.g., چا ته مه وایه / “tell no one”) used identically at every occurrence so the refrain’s literary pattern remains visible to the reader, then lift progressively at 10:47-48 and 15:39 per the doctrine’s own narrative arc. |
| Jesus’ Authority over Sickness, Sin, and Nature | واک (authority, new High); روغ شوی / نجات موندل (heal/save, new High); ناپاک روح (unclean spirit, new Critical); دیو (demon, new Medium) | واک shares a root family with the negative پر مخکې واکمني کول (10:42) and must be kept lexically separable. روغ شوی/نجات موندل’s healing/salvation double sense (σῴζω) requires per-occurrence judgment with no fixed rule. ناپاک روح must never lose its qualifier or it collapses toward روح القدس. | Reuse واک exactly, never applying it or a cognate to Jesus’s opponents’ abusive action. Track σῴζω occurrences individually per the glossary’s own guidance (medical vs. eternal sense) and mark load-bearing ambiguous instances (5:34; 10:52) for theologian review. Never abbreviate ناپاک روح. |
| The Ransom for Many | فدیه (ransom, new Critical); د…پر ځای / د…په بدل کې (substitution, new Critical); د تړون وینه (blood of covenant, new Critical) | فدیه defaults to Islamic-legal discharge-of-obligation compensation (Qur’an 2:196, 47:4), understating a life-for-life substitution. بدل (rejected as the noun) is the operative term of Pashtunwali’s badal revenge-cycle and would import retaliation logic into a text whose logic is gracious substitution, not retaliation. | Reuse فدیه and the prepositional substitution phrase exactly, per baseline rejection of بدل as ransom-noun. Deploy the nanawatai (ritual submission accepted in place of retaliation) cultural bridge explicitly and consistently at every atonement-adjacent passage (10:45; 14:24), calibrated per the baseline’s caution that the analogy is not exact (nanawatai still requires the guilty party’s own submission act, unlike Christ’s, offered on behalf of the guilty). |
2. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods
2a. Genuine Gaps (no native Pashto lexical equivalent exists)
| Concept | Gap Description | Resolution Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Son of Man (apocalyptic-authority sense) | No Pashto idiom independently carries Daniel 7’s exalted-judge content; “د انسان زوی” reads only as “a human being” absent instruction. | Periphrastic teaching note required at first major occurrence (2:10) and reinforced at 8:31, 13:26, 14:62 — not solvable lexically. |
| Ransom/substitutionary atonement as a unified single-word concept | Nearest native legal/customary term (بدل) carries retaliation-cycle logic; nearest Islamic-register term (فدیه) carries discharge-of-obligation logic; neither natively means “one life freely given in place of many others, ending debt rather than continuing a cycle.” | Use فدیه lexically but require mandatory explanatory scaffolding (nanawatai bridge + explicit “not a repayment you owe, a gift given to release you” contrast) at every occurrence. |
| Kingdom “already/not yet” tension (inaugurated eschatology) | Pashto has no grammatical or idiomatic marker distinguishing “reign that has begun but is not yet consummated” from either a purely future or purely past/completed reign. | Carry the distinction through explicit teaching apparatus (footnotes/lesson text), not through the noun phrase د خدای پاچاهي itself. |
| Bridegroom-as-messianic-self-claim (2:19-20) | زوم (bridegroom) is lexically simple but the metaphor “my presence is a wedding, my absence is mourning” has no automatic native theological reading. | Explicit unpacking required at first occurrence; no lexical fix available. |
| Cup as “appointed portion of suffering” (10:38; 14:36) | پیاله is a completely ordinary household object in Pashtun tea-culture with no native extension to “assigned divine judgment/suffering.” | Teach the OT idiom explicitly (Isaiah 51:17, Jeremiah 25:15 background) rather than relying on the word to signal metaphorical extension unaided. |
2b. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Deliberate Fencing
| Neighborhood | Competing/Adjacent Terms | Fencing Rule |
|---|---|---|
| روح-root vocabulary (Spirit) | روح القدس (Holy Spirit); ناپاک روح (unclean spirit); روحاني ورکړې (spiritual gifts, Romans-baseline) | ناپاک روح’s qualifier ناپاک must never be dropped, abbreviated, or implied by context alone; the two phrases must never appear close enough in a single lesson without their qualifiers fully spelled out, given the shared root and Mark’s own deliberate contrast (3:29-30 explicitly opposes blasphemy against روح القدس to unclean-spirit activity). |
| خداوند-root vocabulary (Lordship) | خداوند (Lord, Critical, reserved for Christ’s supreme Lordship); پر مخکې واکمني کول (to lord over/dominate, 10:42, negative worldly domination); مالک (owner/master, already rejected in baseline) | خداوند and its cognates must never be used to render 10:42’s κατακυριεύω, even loosely or poetically; this is the single most consequential fencing rule in the Mark package, since it directly serves the core passage’s own rhetorical contrast (worldly rulers “lord it over” vs. Jesus who came to serve). |
| صداقت/سدال-adjacent honor-shame vocabulary carried from Romans (not directly reused in Mark’s narrative vocabulary but latent in shame/mockery scenes) | شرمیدل (shame, 8:38); ملنډې وهل (mock/ridicule, 15:16-20, 29-32); رسوایی (disgrace, a candidate NOT currently in glossary) | Keep شرمیدل reserved for the disciple’s own potential shame of Christ (8:38) distinct from ملنډې وهل describing what was done to Christ (15:16-20); do not let the two collapse into one generic “shame” word, since the doctrinal point (disciples must not be ashamed of the one who bore shame for them) depends on the directional distinction remaining visible. |
| توبه (repentance) neighborhood | توبه/توبه کول (repentance, Islamic-devotional default); Christ’s own direct authority to forgive (2:5-10, no single noun, expressed narratively) | Every occurrence of توبه must be anchored back to 1:15’s kingdom-announcement and 2:10’s authority-to-forgive claim so it is not read as a self-contained, self-directed devotional act sufficient on its own (the tauba-and-Allah’s-mercy framework), but as response to Christ’s specific in-breaking authority. |
| جهنم (Gehenna) neighborhood | جهنم (standard Quranic hell-term, richly elaborated multi-level Islamic eschatology); تلپاتې ګناه (eternal/unforgivable sin, ch. 3) | جهنم must be explicitly and repeatedly distinguished from its full Quranic apparatus (named levels, deeds-ledger admission criteria, folk punishments); do not allow جهنم’s occurrence in 9:43-48 to silently import that entire framework by default. |
| قربان/قربانی neighborhood | قربان (Corban, 7:11, a specific abused vow-formula); د تړون وینه (blood of the covenant, 14:24); routine Eid al-Adha Qurbani practice | Corban (7:11) must be taught as Jesus critiquing a legal loophole, NOT sacrificial dedication generally; blood-of-covenant (14:24) must be taught as a once-for-all, non-repeatable atoning act, NOT an annual/seasonal Qurbani-style sacrifice — two adjacent but doctrinally distinct uses of sacrificial-register vocabulary within six chapters of each other. |
| رواج/حکم (tradition/commandment) neighborhood | رواج (tradition, human custom); حکم (commandment, God’s instruction, also = formal sharia legal ruling in ordinary Pashto usage) | Keep رواج strictly for the human, displaceable customs Jesus critiques (7:3-13) and حکم strictly for God’s own direct instruction; do not let حکم drift toward reading as “one fiqh ruling among many administered by religious scholars,” which would blunt Jesus’s direct-divine-authority claim. |
| پیغمبر (prophet) neighborhood | پیغمبر (prophet, applied to Elijah, John the Baptist, popular views of Jesus); مسیح (Messiah); د خدای زوی (Son of God) | Every popular “he is a prophet” assessment of Jesus (6:4, 6:15, 8:28) must be paired in teaching material with the fuller titles the crowds themselves fail to reach, reinforcing that “prophet” alone is Mark’s own narrated inadequate answer, not a synonym the translator may substitute freely for Christ’s full identity. |
3. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions
Mark preserves several Aramaic/Hebrew expressions untranslated in the Greek text itself, then glosses them — a deliberate literary/oral-performance technique. This package follows Mark’s own method rather than silently translating these away.
| Term | Original | Decision | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Talitha koum (5:41) | ταλιθὰ κούμ | Transliterate + gloss: طلیتا قوم (زويي، پاڅه!) | Mirrors Mark’s own bilingual technique exactly; preserves the intimacy and eyewitness-vividness of the original scene for an oral-performance-oriented readership. |
| Ephphatha (7:34) | ἐφφαθά | Transliterate + gloss: اېفَتا (پرانستل شه!) | Same rationale as Talitha koum; no doctrinal content is lost or gained either way, so fidelity to Mark’s own literary choice governs. |
| Abba (14:36) | ἀββά | Transliterate, no gloss needed (already established in Romans baseline as ابا) | Already fixed by the baseline for its Romans 8:15 occurrence; Mark 14:36 is the narrative enactment of the same intimacy and must use the identical Pashto form for cross-document consistency. |
| Hosanna (11:9-10) | ὡσαννά | Transliterate + footnote gloss: هوشعنا | Untranslated acclamation in every major Bible tradition Pashto readers might encounter; a footnote (“save now!,” quoting Psalm 118) preserves both the liturgical flavor and the doctrinal content. |
| Cry of dereliction (15:34) | Ἐλωΐ Ἐλωΐ, λεμὰ σαβαχθανί | Transliterate + full gloss, not paraphrase alone: ایلوی ایلوی، لما سبقتني (خدایه زما، خدایه زما، ته ولې پرېښودم؟) | The Aramaic-then-Greek layering in Mark’s own text signals this cry’s rawness and its Psalm 22 citation; a paraphrase-only rendering would flatten both the literary shock and the fulfillment-of-prophecy link. Requires accompanying theological framing per the term registry (no actual Trinitarian rupture). |
| Corban (7:11) | κορβάν | Transliterate (قربان) + explanatory footnote, not paraphrase | The Pashto/Islamicate cognate قربان is a genuine etymological and conceptual match; paraphrasing it away (e.g., “a gift dedicated to God”) would lose the sharp legal-loophole irony Jesus specifically targets. Footnote must clarify Jesus critiques the abuse of the vow-formula, not dedication or Qurbani practice itself. |
| Passover (14:1, 12-16) | πάσχα | Transliterate (فسح/پسخه) + mandatory background teaching, not paraphrase | No adequate one-word paraphrase exists; the term requires Exodus background scaffolding regardless of rendering choice, so transliteration preserves the proper-noun/festival-name character while background material carries the conceptual load. |
| Legion (5:9) | Λεγιών | Transliterate (لیژن) + brief historical gloss | A proper military-unit name; paraphrasing (e.g., “a great many”) would erase the resonant, historically specific “occupying foreign army” image that lands with unusual force for a readership with its own experience of foreign military occupation. |
| Beelzebul (3:22) | Βεελζεβούλ | Transliterate (بعل زبول) + footnote gloss (“prince of the demons,” as Mark’s own text glosses it) | Mark glosses the name himself in-text; Pashto should do the same rather than either omitting the proper name or substituting a generic “Satan” that would lose the controversy’s specific historical vocabulary. |
| Gehenna (9:43-48) | γέεννα | Do NOT transliterate a new form; use existing loanword جهنم, but fence it heavily (see §2b) | Unlike the items above, جهنم is not a neutral proper name needing introduction — it is already a maximally loaded existing term. Paraphrase (e.g., “the fire that never goes out”) is used alongside جهنم as explanatory apparatus, but the noun itself is retained since no equally weighty Pashto alternative exists and total avoidance would leave the passage’s severity under-communicated. |
| Son of Man (throughout) | ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου | Literal calque, not paraphrase: د انسان زوی | A dynamic paraphrase (e.g., “the Messiah,” “the exalted one”) would erase the deliberate ambiguity Mark exploits (ordinary human self-reference vs. Daniel 7 glory); the literal calque preserves the ambiguity for later teaching to resolve, consistent with Mark’s own rhetorical strategy. |
4. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities in Mark
Ranked by combined severity of doctrinal stakes, likelihood of misreading given the surrounding Islamicate and Pashtunwali cultural defaults, and consequence of error. All below are Critical or High tier and require human theologian review per the escalation rules inherited from the baseline’s 12_ai_translation_requirements.md framework.
- “Ransom for many” / substitutionary ἀντί (10:45) — the core passage’s own climax. Highest risk: فدیه read as Islamic-legal compensation, or بدل-adjacent thinking importing badal revenge-cycle logic, both of which would relocate the text’s grace-logic into a debt-repayment or retaliation-satisfaction framework.
- Son of Man (throughout, esp. 2:10, 8:31, 13:26, 14:62) — highest risk of silent under-translation: the calque reads as merely confirming Jesus’s plain humanity, reinforcing rather than correcting the Quranic “human prophet only” default, unless the Daniel 7 content is actively taught at every major occurrence.
- Necessity of suffering, δεῖ + πάσχω (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34) — directly opposes the mainstream expectation, compounded by Qur’an 4:157, that a true prophet/Messiah would be rescued rather than subjected to suffering; risk of the doctrine being heard as narrative misfortune rather than divinely necessary, Scripture-fulfilling plan.
- Crucifixion, σταυρόω/σταυρός (15:20-25) — the single highest-stakes historical-event term in the book, given Qur’an 4:157’s explicit denial; requires paired oral/eyewitness apologetic material at every occurrence, not lexical caution alone.
- Blood of the covenant (14:24) — risk of being heard as a repeatable, seasonal Qurbani-style sacrifice, or as a negotiated Pashtunwali-style pact between equals (تړون’s own baseline caution), rather than a once-for-all, unilaterally sealed atoning covenant.
- Unclean spirit vs. Holy Spirit (throughout, esp. 1:23-27; 3:28-30) — risk of the qualifier ناپاک being dropped or softened in oral delivery, momentarily collapsing the sharpest theological contrast in the book’s spiritual-warfare material into ambiguity around the shared روح root.
- Gehenna (9:43-48) — risk of silently importing the entire elaborated Quranic multi-level, deeds-ledger hell cosmology via the existing loanword جهنم, rather than Mark’s own simpler, final, non-graduated warning.
- Cry of dereliction (15:34) — risk of either flattening the cry into mere rhetorical drama (losing Psalm 22’s fulfillment force) or, in the opposite direction, being misread as an actual rupture within the Godhead, especially acute given the culture’s strong expectation that God would never abandon his righteous prophet.
- “I am,” ἐγώ εἰμι (6:50; climactically 14:62) — risk of under-translation into a merely reassuring “it’s me,” losing the Exodus 3:14 self-disclosure echo that the Sanhedrin’s blasphemy charge in 14:62-64 depends on for its narrative logic to make sense at all.
- Mystery/Messianic Secret (4:11; and the recurring silencing commands 1:34, 1:44, 3:12, 8:30, 9:9) — risk of رمز/پټ راز being heard through a Sufi asrar frame of earned esoteric initiation, inverting Mark’s own point that this is a freely given disclosure; separately, risk that the silencing-command refrain is smoothed into ordinary narrative color and its deliberate reveal/conceal literary structure is lost.
- Lord over/dominate vs. Lord, κατακυριεύω vs. κύριος (10:42 vs. throughout) — risk of accidental lexical bleed-through (use of خداوند-cognate vocabulary for the negative worldly-domination sense), which would directly undermine the core passage’s own rhetorical contrast between worldly rulers and Christ’s servant-Lordship.
- Slave of all, δοῦλος + πάντων (10:44) — risk that غلام’s positive ‘abd-of-God devotional resonance is assumed to cover “slave of all people” without remainder, when in fact this is Mark’s own deliberate radical escalation with no ready cultural or devotional parallel.
- Corban (7:11) — risk that the strong positive Qurbani-practice association overrides the passage’s actual, narrower point (a legal loophole abused to avoid honoring parents), producing an unintended critique of sacrificial practice itself.
- Cup of suffering (10:38; 14:36) — risk of the metaphorical “appointed suffering” sense being missed entirely in favor of the completely ordinary literal household object, especially for lower-literacy oral-culture hearers encountering the metaphor without supporting narration.
- Unforgivable sin (3:28-30) — risk of pastoral misapplication (despair over an imagined unforgivable specific sin) given the surrounding deeds-and-Allah’s-mercy framework’s greater comfort with the possibility of forgiveness for nearly any sin; requires careful “settled rejection, not any specific act” framing.
5. Coverage Statement
This analysis surveys all sixteen chapters of Mark. Chapters/pericopes contributing no new terms or ambiguity risk beyond what is already captured above are explicitly noted here rather than silently omitted:
- Mark 1 — source of gospel, calling, holy, baptism, unclean spirit, demon, authority, Sabbath (background), repentance; fully covered above.
- Mark 2 — source of Son of Man, sin/forgiveness, fasting, bridegroom, Sabbath, tradition-adjacent controversy seeds; fully covered above.
- Mark 3 — source of apostle/calling of the Twelve, Satan, Beelzebul, blasphemy, unforgivable sin, kingdom-of-Satan-divided imagery (no new term beyond items already tabulated); fully covered above.
- Mark 4 — source of parable, mystery, kingdom-growth imagery, fear/faith (storm); fully covered above.
- Mark 5 — source of Legion, unclean spirit (Gerasene), heal/save double sense, Talitha koum, faith/fear pairing; fully covered above.
- Mark 6 — source of prophet (rejection at Nazareth), mission/sending of the Twelve, thanksgiving (feeding miracle), ego eimi (walking on water), power of God; fully covered above.
- Mark 7 — source of tradition, commandment, Corban, defile/unclean, Ephphatha; fully covered above.
- Mark 8 — source of Messiah/Christ confession, necessity-must-suffer, rejected, cross (discipleship metaphor), self-denial, shame; the chapter’s second feeding miracle and leaven-warning introduce no additional new terms beyond those already tabulated.
- Mark 9 — source of transfiguration, unbelief, cause-to-stumble, Gehenna, child (kingdom-receptivity); the second Passion prediction repeats vocabulary already tabulated under Mark 8/10.
- Mark 10 — the core passage (10:35-45) and its immediate context: cup of suffering, baptism (metaphorical), glory, lord-over/dominate, servant, slave, ransom, substitution (ἀντί); also divorce/adultery, eternal-life/inheritance, Son of David (Bartimaeus) — fully covered above as the analytical center of this document.
- Mark 11 — source of Hosanna, temple/den of robbers; the fig-tree cursing and question-of-authority exchange introduce no new terms beyond “authority,” already tabulated.
- Mark 12 — source of vineyard, cornerstone, love (greatest commandment), Son of David/Lord riddle (12:35-37, reusing already-tabulated David/Messiah vocabulary); the widow’s-mite pericope introduces no new theological vocabulary.
- Mark 13 — source of abomination of desolation, tribulation, watch/stay alert, election/elect (apocalyptic); fully covered above.
- Mark 14 — source of handed-over, Passover, blood of the covenant, will/thelema (Gethsemane), Abba; the arrest and trial narrative reuses blasphemy and Son of Man vocabulary already tabulated.
- Mark 15 — source of King of the Jews, crucify/cross (literal), mock/ridicule, cry of dereliction; Son of God climaxes here (centurion’s confession, already tabulated under Section 1 baseline reuse).
- Mark 16 — source of resurrection (fulfilled), angel; the longer-ending textual note is flagged in the glossary as a textual-critical/practical-safety item requiring platform-convention footnoting, not a new lexical-doctrinal item.
No chapter of Mark has been left unreviewed. This document, together with 08_core_glossary.md’s Section 2 new-term table, constitutes the full linguistic foundation for Phase 2 segment translation of Mark under this Language Package.