Linguistic Gap Analysis: Genesis (English → Spanish)

1. Purpose and Scope

This document executes Phase 1 Step 8 for the Genesis curriculum. It analyzes the Spanish lexical resources available for the eight named Genesis doctrines — Creation Ex Nihilo, The Image of God, The Fall and the Origin of Sin, The Abrahamic Covenant and Promise, Providence and the Sovereignty of God, Sin’s Consequences and Common Grace, Covenant Faithfulness across Generations, Joseph and God’s Providence in Suffering — against the baseline Romans Language Package, identifies where Spanish vocabulary is missing or dangerously crowded with rival meanings, decides where transliteration is preferable to paraphrase, and ranks the highest-risk ambiguities the destination language creates for this specific book. It governs and is consistent with analysis/08_core_glossary.md; where the two overlap, this document supplies the reasoning behind the glossary’s choices.

Core passage anchor: Genesis 1:1–2:3 (Creation Ex Nihilo doctrine), but analysis spans Genesis 1–50 per the full-book coverage mandate.

2. Method

For each doctrine, this analysis asks:

1. What Spanish term(s) are already available (from general usage, from the Reina-Valera/Catholic Bible tradition, or from the Romans baseline)?
2. What semantic weight does the Hebrew original carry that the available Spanish term(s) fail to carry, or carry too much of (a rival meaning)?
3. Is the risk one of missing vocabulary (no adequate Spanish term exists and a compound/gloss must be built) or a crowded semantic neighborhood (a perfectly good Spanish word already carries a strong, competing association from Hispanic Catholic devotional culture, folk religion, or secular usage)?
4. Should the term be transliterated, paraphrased, or rendered by an existing baseline term — and why?

Risk tiers (Critical/High/Medium/Low) follow the baseline’s doctrine_risk_registry.json definitions exactly.

---

3. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

Doctrine	Available Spanish Term(s)	Weaknesses / Risk	Recommended Strategy
Creation Ex Nihilo	crear/creó; hacer/formar as loose synonyms in everyday speech	Spanish speakers use “crear,” “hacer,” and “formar” interchangeably in ordinary registers (e.g., “crear un problema,” “hacer la cena”). This flattens the Hebrew’s careful three-verb distinction (bara/yatsar/asah) and risks the ex-nihilo doctrine being read as mere reorganization of pre-existing stuff, especially since Spanish has no dedicated “make-from-nothing” verb the way English can gloss with “create.”	Lexically fence “crear” for bara alone; never use it to translate yatsar or asah. Supply a standing teaching note at 1:1 and 1:27 explaining the verb distinction is doctrinally load-bearing even though Spanish itself does not mark it morphologically.
The Image of God	imagen; semejanza	CRITICAL crowded neighborhood. “Imagen” is the everyday Spanish word for a venerated statue, holy card, or icon of a saint or the Virgin in Hispanic Catholic devotional practice (“la imagen de la Virgen de Guadalupe”). The doctrine requires the opposite referent: every human being, not a devotional object, images God.	Retain “imagen y semejanza” (the historic Spanish Bible pairing) rather than “imagen” alone; mandate a teaching note at every occurrence distinguishing the theological “imagen de Dios” (personhood-bearing) from devotional “imágenes” (object-venerating). Never let the base translation stand without this paired phrase.
The Fall and the Origin of Sin	pecado; caída; árbol del conocimiento del bien y del mal; maldición	Spanish has “pecado” (baseline-established, reused) but no single word for “the Fall” as a theological event — “la caída” is a constructed theological label, not a natural Genesis-3 narrative term, and risks being heard as a plain physical fall rather than a cosmic rupture. “Maldición” collides with folk-witchcraft “mal de ojo”/curse-removal culture.	Use “la caída” only as a doctrine-label heading (as this curriculum already does), never as if it were a direct Bible-text rendering; keep “pecado” per baseline; fence “maldición” with an explicit note distinguishing God’s judicial pronouncement from a removable folk hex.
The Abrahamic Covenant and Promise	pacto; promesa; descendencia; bendición; justicia imputada	”Pacto” is baseline-established and safe. “Promesa” is safe and unambiguous. “Descendencia” must be held rigorously consistent across every seed-line occurrence (3:15 → 12:7 → 15:5 → 22:18 → 49:10) or the promise-line becomes untraceable for the learner. “Bendición” is dangerously crowded (see §5).	Reuse “pacto”/“justicia imputada” exactly per baseline; standardize “descendencia” across all occurrences (reserve “simiente” for direct RV-style quotation only); fence “bendición” against prosperity-gospel flattening with a mandatory teaching note.
Providence and the Sovereignty of God	providencia; Dios me envió; Dios lo tornó en bien; destino/suerte (rejected)	Spanish vernacular has strong, ready-made fatalistic vocabulary (“fue el destino,” “así estaba escrito,” “de la suerte”) that is more natural-sounding than “providencia” in everyday speech, creating constant pressure toward a fatalistic mistranslation drift, especially in Joseph narrative summary statements (45:5-8; 50:20).	Never use “destino”/“suerte” for providence language (per baseline precedent); always use personal, purposive phrasing (“Dios lo dispuso,” “Dios lo tornó en bien”) that keeps God as a personal agent, not an impersonal force.
Sin’s Consequences and Common Grace	pecado; gracia; corrompido; maldición; ídolos	”Gracia” is baseline-safe. The doctrine of common grace (God’s restraining, non-salvific favor toward a fallen and unbelieving world — e.g., Noah’s contemporaries, Abimelech, Laban) has no distinct Spanish lexeme separate from saving grace; “gracia” alone does not signal the distinction.	Introduce a consistent explanatory gloss — “la gracia común de Dios” — as a taught doctrinal label whenever Genesis narrates God restraining sin’s full consequences among the unregenerate (e.g., Cain’s mark, 4:15; Abimelech, 20:6), distinguishing it explicitly from saving grace.
Covenant Faithfulness across Generations	pacto; fidelidad; misericordia/fidelidad amorosa (chesed); bendición; señal	Spanish “fidelidad” is generically usable for any kind of faithfulness (marital, professional, national) and does not automatically carry covenant-relational weight; “chesed” (loyal-love-within-covenant) has no single-word Spanish equivalent at all — a genuine missing-vocabulary gap.	Retain the compound gloss “misericordia / fidelidad amorosa” for chesed per the core glossary, with a standing teaching note (not merely a one-time footnote) distinguishing it from both generic “amor” and from “gracia” (chen), since the distinction recurs across four generations of the narrative (Abraham → Isaac → Jacob → Joseph).
Joseph and God’s Providence in Suffering	Dios me envió; Dios lo tornó/transformó en bien; sueño; providencia	The doctrine’s capstone verse (50:20) requires holding two claims in the same breath — genuine human evil intent AND God’s sovereign good purpose — and Spanish, like English, has no single term that does this; it must be carried by careful clause structure, not vocabulary alone.	Preserve the concessive-then-affirming clause structure of 50:20 exactly (“vosotros pensasteis mal contra mí, mas Dios lo tornó en bien”) rather than compressing it into a single simplified sentence; treat this as a syntax-level, not merely lexical, translation requirement.

---

4. Missing Vocabulary

Genuine lexical gaps — concepts for which Spanish has no single adequate word, requiring a compound phrase, standing teaching note, or borrowed structure rather than a one-word substitute:

1. chesed (covenant loyal-love) — No Spanish word combines “loyalty,” “love,” and “covenant obligation” the way chesed does. “Misericordia” leans toward mercy-to-the-undeserving; “fidelidad” leans toward reliability; “amor” is too generic. Gap must be filled by a standing compound gloss and recurring teaching note, not a single lexeme.
2. nefesh chayyah vs. neshamah/ruach distinctions — Spanish “alma” imports a Greek-philosophical body/soul dualism the Hebrew anthropology does not intend. There is no Spanish word that captures “embodied living creature” without either sounding clinical (“ser viviente,” adopted) or importing dualism (“alma,” rejected). Gap filled by “ser viviente” + explicit contrastive teaching note against “alma.”
3. The Fall as a single theological noun — Hebrew narrates the event (ch. 3) but has no equivalent to the Latin-derived theological shorthand “the Fall”/“la caída.” Spanish “caída” is a retrofitted doctrinal label, not a Genesis-text word. Gap filled by treating “la caída” strictly as a curriculum heading, never as Bible-text translation.
4. Common grace as a distinct category from saving grace — no distinct Spanish lexeme; “gracia común” is a constructed theological compound, not a natural phrase a Spanish-speaking learner would produce unprompted. Gap filled by consistent introduction and repetition of the compound term with definition.
5. bara’s ex-nihilo specificity — Spanish “crear” today is used loosely (creative writing, business “creación de empleos”) and does not, on its own, communicate “from nothing” any more precisely than English “create” does. Gap filled by teaching note, not lexical substitute — no better single word exists in either language.
6. “Shiloh” (49:10) referential ambiguity — Spanish has no established consensus rendering resolving whether “Siloh” names a place, a person, or functions as an epithet (“until he to whom it belongs comes”). This is a source-text interpretive gap, not a Spanish deficiency; transliterate and flag rather than resolve unilaterally (see §6, ranked risk #4).

---

5. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing

Unlike missing vocabulary, these are cases where Spanish has a perfectly serviceable word, but that word already carries strong, well-established competing associations in Hispanic religious or folk culture that will actively mislead learners unless fenced with explicit teaching notes and, in some cases, mandatory phrase-pairing.

Spanish Term	Competing Association	Fence Required
imagen	Venerated statues/icons of saints and the Virgin (devotional object)	Always pair as “imagen y semejanza”; never let “imagen” stand alone in a Genesis 1 context without the accompanying note that every human, not an object, images God. Highest-priority fence in this entire glossary.
bendición / bendijo	Prosperity-gospel material-wealth guarantee; casual social greeting (“Dios te bendiga”)	Teach Genesis’s blessing as vocational and covenantal (fruitfulness, presence, mission), not a guarantee of health/wealth; contrast explicitly with prosperity-teaching media common in contemporary Latin American broadcast religion.
maldición / maldito	Folk witchcraft, “mal de ojo,” curses removable by a curandero or ritual object	Teach every occurrence (3:14, 17; 4:11; 9:25) as God’s own judicial pronouncement, never a hex subject to counter-ritual removal.
ídolos / dioses domésticos (teraphim)	Contemporary object-veneration practices in parts of the Hispanic world (santos, milagros, amulets)	Fence with explicit idolatry-contrast teaching; do not soften to neutral “figuras familiares.”
pacto vs. alianza	”Alianza” is the dominant Catholic-tradition Bible term (Biblia de Jerusalén, Biblia Latinoamericana); mixing the two within one curriculum could read as doctrinally inconsistent to Catholic-formed learners	Standardize on “pacto” throughout per baseline; note “alianza” as an acceptable ecumenical synonym only in explanatory apparatus, never inconsistently within the running text.
vocación (avoid) vs. llamado	”Vocación” is culturally reserved for a call to priesthood/religious life	Genesis’s “vete” (12:1) and covenant-call language must use “llamado” family per baseline; never “vocación” unqualified.
providencia vs. destino/suerte	Everyday fatalistic vernacular is more natural-sounding than the theological term	Always keep God personal and purposive in translation choice; never let a natural-sounding fatalistic gloss substitute for the deliberately personal “providencia.”
santo/santificó (2:3) vs. santos (canonized)	Same crowded neighborhood the baseline already documents for Romans 1:7, now anchored at its first scriptural occurrence	Carry the baseline’s mandatory teaching note forward to Genesis 2:3 as the doctrine’s textual root, even though “santos” (plural, applied to people) does not itself occur in Genesis.
sueño (dream)	Esoteric dream-interpretation, folk dream-divination manuals (“diccionario de los sueños”) widely circulated in Hispanic popular culture	Fence Joseph’s revelatory dreams (37; 40–41) explicitly against occult dream-divination frameworks, paralleling the baseline’s “profecía” vs. “horóscopo” caution.

---

6. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term	Decision	Rationale
Elohim, YHWH	Established Spanish Bible form (Dios; Señor/Jehová) — not transliterated	Universal, doctrinally settled forms already govern all Spanish Bible tradition; transliterating the Hebrew (e.g., “Elohim,” “Yahveh”) would break with reader expectation and the baseline’s own convention.
Abba (Romans 8:15, retained for forward cross-reference)	Transliterate, paired with “Padre”	Baseline precedent; not a Genesis-native term but held for consistency.
Melquisedec	Transliterate (standard proper-name transliteration)	Established across all Spanish Bible traditions; no paraphrase possible for a proper name.
Shiloh (49:10)	Transliterate as “Siloh,” flag, do not paraphrase	Paraphrasing (e.g., “hasta que venga el legítimo dueño”) would silently resolve a live scholarly and messianic-typological debate; transliteration preserves ambiguity for teaching, consistent with the baseline’s caution against foreclosing contested terms (cf. “hijos de Dios/gigantes,” 6:1-4).
El Shaddai / El Elyon	Paraphrase into established devotional titles (“Dios Todopoderoso” / “Dios Altísimo”) rather than transliterate	Unlike YHWH, these compound titles already have long-standing, doctrinally safe Spanish devotional equivalents in wide liturgical use; transliteration would sound foreign without doctrinal gain.
tohu va-vohu	Paraphrase (“desordenada y vacía”)	No proper-noun status; transliteration would be unintelligible and paraphrase carries the meaning adequately once fenced against a rival “eternal chaos-force” reading.
bara / yatsar / asah	Paraphrase with lexical fencing, not transliteration	These are common verbs, not technical proper terms; the doctrinal need is consistency of Spanish verb choice, not preservation of the Hebrew form.
nissah (tested)	Paraphrase (“probó,” never “tentó”)	Ordinary verb; the risk is choosing the wrong Spanish synonym, not a transliteration decision.
YHWH yireh	Hybrid: retain covenant-name compound structure in Spanish (“Jehová provee” / “el Señor provee”)	Follows baseline’s Reina-Valera compound-name convention (cf. “Jehová-jireh” transliterated form also acceptable in direct quotation); pure paraphrase (“Dios proveerá”) loses the covenant-name force and must be avoided as primary rendering.
chesed	Paraphrase via standing compound gloss, not transliteration	Transliterating “chesed” into teaching materials for a general Bible-study audience (unlike specialist Hebrew study) would create an unfamiliar technical burden disproportionate to the term’s frequency; the compound gloss “misericordia / fidelidad amorosa” plus teaching note better serves the reading-level target.
toledot	Paraphrase (“generaciones” / “esta es la historia de…”)	Structural marker, not theologically loaded enough to warrant transliteration; consistency of the chosen paraphrase across every recurrence is what matters.

---

7. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities for This Curriculum

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × probability of drift given Spanish-language cultural context):

1. “Imagen” (Image of God, 1:26-27) — CRITICAL. The single highest-risk term in the entire Genesis glossary because the identical Spanish word is the everyday term for venerated devotional statues/icons across the Hispanic Catholic world. Without the mandatory “imagen y semejanza” pairing and teaching note at every occurrence, learners will not spontaneously recover the doctrine’s actual referent (every human person) from the word alone. Grounded reason: this is a direct lexical collision, not merely a nuance gap — the dominant real-world referent of “imagen” in religious Spanish speech is the opposite of the doctrine’s meaning.

2. “Dios lo tornó en bien” (Providence, 50:20) — CRITICAL. The doctrinal capstone of the Joseph narrative requires holding the brothers’ genuine evil intent and God’s sovereign good purpose together in one sentence; Spanish’s more natural fatalistic vernacular (“así lo quiso el destino,” “todo pasa por algo”) is readily available and rhetorically smoother, creating constant translator/reviewer pressure to drift toward a softer, less personally sovereign rendering. Grounded reason: the easier, more natural-sounding Spanish phrasing is doctrinally wrong; correctness requires resisting fluency pressure.

3. “Justicia imputada” / “lo contó por justicia” (Genesis 15:6) — CRITICAL. This is the direct Old Testament anchor of the baseline’s single most historically fraught Reformation-Trent fault line (Romans 4:3 quotes this verse verbatim). Any drift toward an infused/cooperative rendering here would create a doctrinal inconsistency the learner would later re-encounter, magnified, in the Romans curriculum. Grounded reason: cross-curriculum consistency is not optional — this verse is the textual seed of a Critical baseline rule.

4. “Cetro / Siloh” (49:10) — High, elevated for messianic sensitivity. A contested, textually ambiguous messianic term where an over-confident Spanish paraphrase would silently resolve a genuine scholarly debate and could overstate or understate the messianic claim. Grounded reason: mistranslation risk here is not a clarity failure but an interpretive overreach failure — the translator’s job is to preserve, not resolve, the ambiguity.

5. “Maldición” (curse language, esp. 9:25) — Critical (compounded by real-world harm). Beyond ordinary doctrinal drift, this specific text has a documented history of racialized misuse in the Americas to justify chattel slavery and subjugation of Black and Indigenous peoples. The risk is not only theological but carries direct real-world harm potential given the curriculum’s Spanish-speaking distribution regions. Grounded reason: historical documented misuse, not hypothetical risk.

6. “Bendición” (prosperity flattening, throughout) — High. Contemporary Latin American prosperity-gospel broadcast religion has significantly reshaped the everyday connotation of “bendición” toward guaranteed material/health outcomes, which risks retroactively reading that framework into Genesis’s vocational-covenantal blessing language (1:28; 12:2-3; 27; 48-49). Grounded reason: high-frequency term (appears at every covenant milestone) with an actively competing, culturally dominant contemporary meaning.

7. “Providencia” vs. vernacular fatalism (“destino”/“suerte”) — High, pervasive. Because Genesis is saturated with statements of God’s directing hand (22:14; 24:1-27; 37-50 throughout), and because Spanish vernacular fatalism is rhetorically natural and idiomatic, this is not a single-verse risk but a running current the translator must resist for fifteen-plus chapters (Joseph narrative alone). Grounded reason: sustained, cumulative exposure across the longest narrative unit in the book, not an isolated flashpoint.

8. “Ser viviente” vs. “alma” (2:7, 1:20-30) — Medium-High. Spanish devotional and funeral-liturgy usage of “alma” is deeply entrenched (e.g., “descanse en paz su alma”), creating pressure to use it even where the Hebrew text’s nefesh chayyah deliberately does not intend Greek-style body/soul dualism. Grounded reason: the natural devotional register of Spanish actively pulls against the text’s own anthropology.

9. “Chesed” compound gloss consistency (24:12,27,49; 32:10; 39:21; 47:29) — High. Because no single Spanish word captures the term, and because the curriculum spans a compound gloss across four narrative generations, inconsistent rendering (sometimes “misericordia,” sometimes “amor,” sometimes “fidelidad” without the compound) would fragment the learner’s ability to trace covenant loyalty as a unified theme. Grounded reason: consistency risk compounds with narrative distance — later occurrences (Joseph, ch. 39, 47) are easy to render independently of earlier ones (Abraham’s servant, ch. 24) without deliberate cross-checking.

10. “Hijos de Dios / gigantes” (6:1-4) — High, interpretive neutrality risk. A contested identification (angelic beings vs. a human dynastic line) where even competent Spanish theological vocabulary could accidentally tip the reader toward one reading through connotation alone (e.g., “gigantes” carries folkloric giant-story associations in Hispanic culture that could either overstate or trivialize the text). Grounded reason: risk lies in unintentional interpretive foreclosure via ordinary word connotation, requiring explicit theologian review rather than lexical fixing.

---

8. Full-Book Chapter Coverage Log (Genesis 1–50)

Per the FULL-BOOK COVERAGE mandate, every chapter has been reviewed for linguistic-gap-relevant vocabulary. Chapters contributing no new terms beyond those already logged are noted explicitly as reviewed.

Chapter(s)	Load-Bearing Terms / Doctrine Touchpoints	Status
1:1–2:3	crear, desordenada y vacía, bueno/muy bueno, expansión/firmamento, género/especie, imagen, semejanza, varón y mujer, dominio/sojuzgar, reposó/descansó, santificó	Core passage — fully analyzed above and in §3-7.
2:4-25	ser viviente, soplo de vida, árbol de la vida, árbol del conocimiento del bien y del mal, ayuda idónea, una sola carne, hombre/Adán	Fully analyzed (§3-7; Image of God doctrine).
3	serpiente, maldito(a)/maldición, descendencia (3:15 protoevangelium), túnicas de piel	Fully analyzed (Fall/Sin doctrine).
4	pecado (personified, 4:7), sacrifice vocabulary (Cain/Abel offerings — no new term beyond “ofrenda,” standard, Low risk), maldición extended, mark/protection of Cain (common grace precursor)	Reviewed; “ofrenda” (offering) noted as standard Low-risk term, no gap beyond existing entries.
5	genealogical toledot formula; “imagen y semejanza” echoed (5:1, reinforcing 1:26-27)	Reviewed — reinforces existing Image of God entry; no new term.
6:1-8	hijos de Dios/gigantes, se dolió/le pesó en su corazón (nacham), se había corrompido (shachat)	Fully analyzed (Sin’s Consequences/Providence doctrines).
6:9-22	pacto (first explicit covenant, 6:18)	Reused from baseline; reviewed.
7-8	olor grato/aroma agradable (8:21), reused pacto anticipation	Fully analyzed (Common Grace doctrine, sacrifice-acceptance framing).
9	señal (rainbow covenant sign, 9:12-17), maldito sea Canaán (9:25)	Fully analyzed — Critical curse-of-Canaan entry.
10	gentiles/naciones (Table of Nations)	Fully analyzed (forward link to Unity of Jews/Gentiles doctrine).
11	toledot formula continuation; Babel narrative — no new theologically load-bearing term beyond existing “orgullo/soberbia” (pride) as a standard, Low-risk moral term not requiring a dedicated glossary entry	Reviewed; no new Critical/High term.
12:1-9	vete (lekh lekha), bendición universalized (12:3), misión seedbed	Fully analyzed (Abrahamic Covenant doctrine).
12:10-20	Egypt sojourn, deception episode — no new term; “temor”/fear as ordinary vocabulary	Reviewed; no new term.
13-14	Melquisedec (14:18-20), diezmo/tithe (standard, Low risk, not separately glossed as it carries no Genesis-specific syncretism risk beyond general “ofrenda” caution)	Fully analyzed (Melchizedek entry).
15	fe/creyó (he’emin), justicia imputada (chashav li-tsedaqah), pacto ratification (15:18)	Fully analyzed — ranked risk #3 above.
16	Hagar/Ismael narrative; “el Dios que me ve” (El-roi) — a minor divine-name compound parallel to El Shaddai/El Elyon, Medium risk, teaching note recommended but not separately tabled given lower recurrence	Reviewed; noted as Medium, consistent with El Shaddai/El Elyon handling.
17	circuncisión, pacto reaffirmed, El Shaddai (Dios Todopoderoso)	Fully analyzed (Abrahamic Covenant/circumcision-as-sign doctrine).
18	intercedió/rogó (Abraham’s plea, 18:22-33), justicia y juicio (18:19), El Elyon-family divine naming	Fully analyzed — intercession precursor, Critical by association.
19	Sodom’s destruction — reuses maldición/juicio vocabulary already fenced; no new term	Reviewed; no new term beyond existing fencing.
20	Abimelech episode — common grace precursor (God restrains Abimelech, 20:6); reuses “gracia” fencing	Reviewed; reinforces Common Grace doctrine entry, no new lexical item.
21	Isaac’s birth, Hagar/Ishmael sent away — reuses “pacto”/“bendición”; no new term	Reviewed.
22	probó (nissah), Jehová provee (YHWH yireh), holocausto/ofrenda quemada	Fully analyzed — ranked risk consideration, Abrahamic Covenant/typology doctrine.
23	Land-purchase/burial narrative — no new theologically load-bearing term; “heredad”/possession is standard	Reviewed; no new term.
24	misericordia/fidelidad amorosa (chesed, 24:12,27,49)	Fully analyzed — ranked risk #9 above.
25	primogenitura (bekhorah, 25:29-34), toledot continuation	Fully analyzed (Covenant Faithfulness doctrine).
26	Isaac repeats Abrahamic covenant promises and deception pattern — reuses existing pacto/bendición vocabulary; no new term	Reviewed.
27	bendición (Jacob/Esau blessing-deception), primogenitura continuation	Reviewed; reinforces existing High-risk “bendición” entry; no new lexical item required.
28	voto (neder, 28:20-22), Bethel theophany	Fully analyzed (Covenant Faithfulness doctrine, vow vs. covenant distinction).
29-31	Jacob/Laban narrative; ídolos/dioses domésticos (teraphim, 31:19,34-35)	Fully analyzed (Sin’s Consequences doctrine, idolatry-contrast).
32	Israel etymology (Yisra’el, 32:28), misericordia/fidelidad amorosa (32:10)	Fully analyzed (Covenant Faithfulness/Israel-naming doctrine).
33	Jacob-Esau reconciliation — no new term; reuses existing “misericordia”/reconciliation vocabulary	Reviewed.
34	contaminó/deshonró (tame, Dinah narrative)	Fully analyzed (Sin’s Consequences doctrine).
35	ídolos reaffirmed (35:2,4), Israel-naming reaffirmed, Bethel altar renewal — reuses existing entries	Reviewed; no new term.
36	Esau’s genealogy — no theologically load-bearing new term; standard genealogical vocabulary	Reviewed; no new term.
37	sueño (chalom, revelatory dream introduced), coat-of-many-colors narrative — no additional new term beyond “sueño”	Fully analyzed (Joseph/Providence doctrine, dream vocabulary).
38	justicia (tsedaqah, ordinary-ethical register, 38:26 — Tamar narrative)	Fully analyzed — reinforces the soteriological/ethical register distinction flagged in the Righteousness entry.
39	misericordia/fidelidad amorosa (chesed, 39:21), gracia (chen, 39:21), pecado (39:9) — reuses existing entries in a new narrative context (Joseph and Potiphar’s wife)	Reviewed; reinforces existing chesed/gracia distinction, no new lexical item.
40-41	sueño continued, Espíritu de Dios recognized in Joseph (41:38)	Fully analyzed (Providence doctrine; Holy Spirit forward-continuity entry).
42-45	Dios me envió (Elohim shelachani, 45:5-8) — testing-and-reconciliation narrative	Fully analyzed (Joseph/Providence doctrine) — ranked risk #2 (anticipatory) above.
46-47	Israel’s descent into Egypt; misericordia/fidelidad amorosa (47:29) — reuses existing entries; no new term	Reviewed.
48	Jacob blesses Joseph’s sons — reuses “bendición” entry; no new term	Reviewed.
49	cetro/Siloh (shevet/Shiloh, 49:10), bendición formulas across all twelve tribes	Fully analyzed — ranked risk #4 above (Messianic Promise forward link).
50	Dios lo tornó/transformó en bien (Elohim chashavah le-tovah, 50:20), os visitará/vendrá en vuestra ayuda (paqad, 50:24-25)	Fully analyzed — ranked risk #2 above (Joseph and God’s Providence in Suffering doctrine capstone).

Coverage confirmation: All 50 chapters of Genesis have been reviewed. Chapters not requiring new glossary action (11, 19, 21, 23, 26, 33, 35, 36, 46-48) are explicitly logged above as reviewed with no new theologically load-bearing vocabulary beyond terms already fenced elsewhere in this document and in 08_core_glossary.md.

---

9. Summary and Handoff

This gap analysis identifies one dominant pattern across the Genesis curriculum: Spanish is lexically well-supplied for Genesis’s vocabulary, but several of its best-supplied words (“imagen,” “bendición,” “maldición,” “pacto”/“alianza,” “vocación,” “santos,” “alma”) are already heavily occupied by competing Hispanic Catholic devotional or folk-religious referents. Unlike some language pairs where the primary risk is missing vocabulary, the primary risk category for Spanish is crowded semantic neighborhoods requiring active fencing, with a secondary risk category of compound-gloss consistency for genuine gaps like chesed. The ranked ambiguity list in §7 should govern Phase 2 review-routing priority within each risk tier, and every term identified here as requiring a “standing teaching note” must carry that note at every occurrence, not merely its first, per the baseline’s escalation precedent for “santos” and “intercesión.”

This analysis feeds directly into 08_core_glossary.md (already produced) and must be treated as the reasoning record behind that glossary’s risk assignments; any future revision to glossary risk tiers should first revisit this document’s rationale.

End of 06_linguistic_gap_analysis.md