Linguistic Gap Analysis
06 Linguistic Gap Analysis — Mark
English → Vietnamese | Full-Book Coverage, Core Passage Mark 10:35-45
0. Method and Scope
This analysis extends the Romans baseline Language Package to the Gospel of Mark. It does not re-derive terms already settled in translation_memory.json; those are reused exactly per the hard rule. Its task is threefold:
- Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix — for each of the eight curriculum doctrines, catalogue the available Vietnamese vocabulary, name its weaknesses, and recommend a translation strategy.
- Gap Mapping — distinguish true missing vocabulary (no adequate Vietnamese term exists at all) from crowded semantic neighborhoods (a Vietnamese term exists but is shared with, or sits adjacent to, a term already carrying strong Buddhist, Confucian, or folk-religious freight, requiring deliberate “fencing” through compounding, footnoting, or context control).
- Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions — a decision log for every proper noun and technical term newly introduced by Mark.
A ranked list of the highest-risk ambiguities for this curriculum closes the document. Full chapter-by-chapter coverage is confirmed in Section 5.
1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix
| # | Doctrine | Available Vietnamese Term(s) | Weaknesses | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jesus as the Suffering Servant and Son of God | Con Đức Chúa Trời (baseline, Critical); Con Người / “Con Người” title (new); đầy tớ (new, “servant”); biến hình (new, “transfiguration”) | Vietnamese has no single native lexical item spanning both “exalted divine Son” and “suffering servant” — the two poles of this doctrine map onto different Vietnamese words (Con Đức Chúa Trời for glory; đầy tớ/Con Người for servanthood), so the paradox is carried by narrative juxtaposition, not by any one term. Risk that readers resolve the tension prematurely toward one pole (either a purely triumphant divine figure, echoing folk-deity expectation, or a purely human sage-teacher, echoing Confucian moral-exemplar expectation). | Do not attempt a single unifying coinage. Preserve both titles side by side at their narrative junctures (esp. Mark 8:29-31; 9:7 vs 9:12; 10:45) and rely on structural placement plus translator notes to hold the paradox open, exactly as the Greek text does. |
| 2 | The Kingdom of God Breaking In | Nước Đức Chúa Trời (baseline, Medium); Tin Lành (baseline, Medium); sự mầu nhiệm (new, “mystery”); đền thờ (new, “temple,” to be distinguished) | “Nước” primarily denotes a territorial/political nation-state in ordinary Vietnamese usage, risking a nationalist or political misreading, especially in passages evoking royal expectation (11:1-10) that Mark deliberately subverts through the cross. | Retain Nước Đức Chúa Trời (already fixed by baseline) but require a contextual gloss at every first occurrence per chapter reminding readers this is God’s sovereign reign already breaking in through Jesus’ words and works, not a future political state — reinforced by the “already/not yet” tension across 1:15, 4:26-32, 9:1, 15:43. |
| 3 | Faith and Discipleship amid Fear | đức tin (baseline, Medium); sự không tin / sự vô tín (new, Medium); chối (new, “deny,” Medium) | Vietnamese devotional vocabulary for fear (sợ hãi, kinh hãi, hoảng sợ) carries no built-in theological valence; the doctrine’s force depends entirely on narrative pairing (fear + faith in the same pericope, e.g., 4:40; 5:33-36; 6:50; 9:24; 16:8), not on any special vocabulary item. | No new coinage needed. Ensure translators keep the fear-vocabulary and đức tin-vocabulary in the same sentence or adjacent clause wherever the Greek juxtaposes them (esp. 4:40, 5:36, 6:50), since natural Vietnamese sentence reordering could separate and weaken the rhetorical pairing. |
| 4 | The Necessity of the Cross | thập tự giá (new, Critical); sự sống lại (baseline, Critical); huyết (new, Critical); phản / phó, bị nộp (new, High); chén (new, High) | The Vietnamese Buddhist-adjacent idiom “chịu khổ để tích đức” (enduring suffering to accumulate merit) is a ready, culturally available frame into which “taking up one’s cross” (8:34) could easily and invisibly slide, since both involve voluntary suffering as a path to a good outcome. | Actively fence thập tự giá and its verb “vác” (take up/carry) away from tích đức framing with an explicit translator note at 8:34-38 clarifying that cross-bearing flows from union with Christ’s already-accomplished, once-for-all death, not from self-generated merit toward one’s own future good. |
| 5 | Servanthood versus Worldly Greatness | đầy tớ (new, High); tôi mọi (new, Critical); cai trị / cầm quyền (new, oppressive sense, High); Chúa (baseline, Critical); quyền / quyền phép (new, High) | Root-sharing crowds this doctrine badly: cai trị/cầm quyền (oppressive worldly rule) share roots with Chúa (Lord) and quyền/quyền phép (Christ’s legitimate authority), so Vietnamese risks visually/aurally blurring exactly the contrast Mark 10:42-45 is built to make. | See Section 2 fencing recommendations below (oppressive-authority cluster). Require consistent, deliberate lexical separation: reserve cai trị/cầm quyền exclusively for the negative “worldly rulers” sense and never let them modify Christ; reserve Chúa/quyền phép exclusively for Christ’s legitimate lordship/authority. |
| 6 | The Messianic Secret | Đấng Christ / Đấng Mê-si-a (baseline, Critical); Con Người (new, Critical); sự mầu nhiệm (new, Critical); ví dụ/thí dụ (new, Medium) | Vietnamese has no native narrative-strategy vocabulary for “deliberate concealment that simultaneously reveals” — the closest available idiom (nói bóng nói gió, “speaking indirectly/allusively”) carries a connotation of evasiveness or social indirection that could read as Jesus being coy or manipulative rather than pedagogically and theologically deliberate. | Do not borrow nói bóng nói gió. Retain literal renderings of “command to silence” (im lặng, cấm không cho nói) and “parable” (ví dụ/thí dụ) as separate, plain terms; let the doctrine be carried by the pattern of repeated commands-to-silence across the narrative (1:34,44; 3:12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:30; 9:9) rather than by a single summarizing Vietnamese term. |
| 7 | Jesus’ Authority over Sickness, Sin, and Nature | quyền / quyền phép (new, High); quỷ / tà linh ô uế (new, Critical); Sa-tan (new, High); vâng phục (new, Medium); được lành bệnh (new, High) | The single largest crowded neighborhood in the whole curriculum: Vietnamese folk religion has an extremely rich, well-populated vocabulary of spirits, mediums, and exorcistic ritual (thần linh, ma, cầu cơ, trừ tà, đồng bóng, lên đồng) that native readers may default to when encountering exorcism/healing narratives. | See Section 2 below for full fencing plan. Every exorcism/healing pericope (1:21-28,29-34,40-45; 2:1-12; 3:1-6,22-30; 5:1-20,21-43; 6:53-56; 7:24-30,31-37; 9:14-29) requires the demon/unclean-spirit vocabulary to be visibly distinct from thần linh, and Christ’s authoritative command-and-obey pattern to be visibly distinct from mediumship negotiation. |
| 8 | The Ransom for Many | giá chuộc (new, Critical); thay cho (new, Critical); tôi mọi (new, Critical); huyết (new, Critical); mạng sống/linh hồn (new, High) | This is a genuine missing-vocabulary case, not merely a crowded one: Vietnamese has no pre-existing single theological term for “a price paid by one party to free another from bondage, received rather than earned by the one freed.” The nearest available vocabulary (chuộc tội, “to redeem/atone for sin”) is itself already colored by Buddhist and folk-religious merit-transfer logic in ordinary usage. | Construct the doctrine through the compound giá chuộc + thay cho + explicit “cho nhiều người” (for many), always co-occurring, and require a translator note every time distinguishing this from self-directed merit-based chuộc tội. This is the single highest-stakes lexical decision in the entire curriculum because the core passage (Mark 10:45) is its sole clear textual anchor. |
2. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods
2.1 True Missing Vocabulary (no adequate Vietnamese term pre-exists)
| Concept | Gap Description | Resolution Adopted |
|---|---|---|
| λύτρον (ransom-price paid by a substitute) | No native Vietnamese word isolates “price paid by another, received without contribution by the one freed” from the broader, merit-inflected chuộc tội semantic field. | Coin/adopt giá chuộc as a fixed compound, always paired with thay cho and “cho nhiều người,” never used interchangeably with bare chuộc tội. |
| ἀντί (strict substitution, “in place of”) | Vietnamese “cho” is doctrinally underdetermined — it covers both “for the benefit of” and “instead of/in place of,” and ordinary usage defaults to the weaker benefit sense. | Require the fuller thay cho rather than bare “cho” at every occurrence tied to Mark 10:45 and 14:24, with a standing translator note. |
| μυστήριον as gracious disclosure (not esoteric secret) | Vietnamese religious vocabulary for “hidden/secret truth” (bí truyền, huyền bí) is drawn almost entirely from esoteric-initiation traditions (Daoist internal alchemy, folk geomancy, Buddhist tantric transmission), where secrecy is a barrier the practitioner must overcome by merit or lineage. | Retain sự mầu nhiệm, explicitly defined at first occurrence (Mark 4:11) as truth God has chosen to give, not truth the disciples earned or unlocked. |
| διάκονος / δοῦλος escalating pair | Vietnamese has serviceable single words (đầy tớ, tôi mọi) but no native mechanism for signaling that the second term is a rhetorical intensification of the first within the same sentence (Mark 10:43-44), since both words function as simple nouns without built-in comparative force. | Preserve the two distinct lexical items in strict lockstep with the Greek (đầy tớ for διάκονος, tôi mọi for δοῦλος) and rely on the parallel sentence structure “…thì phải làm đầy tớ… càng làm lớn hơn thì phải làm tôi mọi…” to carry the escalation, with a translator note flagging the intensification for reviewers. |
| Son of Man’s Danielic authority-dimension | Con Người is a correct, established rendering, but ordinary Vietnamese “con người” (lowercase) is simply the generic noun “a human being / mankind,” with zero built-in echo of Daniel 7’s enthroned, authoritative heavenly figure. | Mandatory capitalization as a title (Con Người) throughout, plus a recurring footnote anchoring the title to Daniel 7:13-14 at its first several occurrences (2:10; 8:31; 13:26; 14:62), since the title alone cannot carry the OT background. |
2.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing
| Neighborhood | Competing Occupants | Fencing Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Spirit-world vocabulary | quỷ (demon) / tà linh ô uế (unclean spirit) / Sa-tan (Satan) / Đức Thánh Linh (Holy Spirit) — all crowding against the broad folk category thần linh (spirits, tutelary land deities, ancestor spirits) and folk exorcistic practice (cầu cơ, trừ tà, đồng bóng, lên đồng, “spirit mediums”) | Never use bare thần linh for any biblical spiritual being in Mark. Keep Đức Thánh Linh always in its full compound form (per baseline precedent). Keep quỷ/tà linh ô uế lexically and syntactically distinct from Đức Thánh Linh in every exorcism narrative. In Mark 5:1-20 (Legion) and 9:14-29, require an explicit translator note contrasting Christ’s one-time, authoritative, command-based deliverance with mediumship’s ongoing negotiation with spirits. |
| Authority/dominance root cluster | Chúa (Lord, positive) / quyền, quyền phép (exousia, positive) / cai trị (katakyrieuō, negative) / cầm quyền (katexousiazō, negative) | Share Greek roots (κύριος, ἐξουσία) but must never share Vietnamese application. Fence by collocation rule: cai trị and cầm quyền may modify only “các vua chúa dân ngoại” (the gentile kings/rulers) in Mark 10:42; Chúa and quyền/quyền phép may modify only Christ or God throughout the Gospel. A translator note at 10:42-45 must flag the deliberate irony that Christ’s true Lordship looks like the opposite of cai trị/cầm quyền. |
| Suffering/merit cluster | thập tự giá (cross) / chịu khổ (to endure suffering) vs. the ambient cultural idiom “chịu khổ để tích đức” (enduring suffering to accumulate merit, công đức) | Fence thập tự giá-bearing language away from any construction resembling tích đức. Every discipleship-cost passage (8:34-38; 10:21,28-30) needs a note anchoring cross-bearing in union with Christ’s finished work, not self-generated future merit. |
| Ritual libation cluster | chén (cup, of suffering) vs. the family-altar ritual chén rượu/trà cúng (a libation cup of wine/tea poured out for ancestors) | Fence with an explicit translator note at every occurrence (10:38-39; 14:23-24,36) distinguishing Christ’s unique, unrepeatable appointed cup of suffering/judgment from any ancestor-veneration libation practice; never let “chén” appear unqualified in a sentence structurally resembling an offering formula. |
| Manifestation/transformation cluster | biến hình (transfiguration) vs. hóa thân (already forbidden per baseline, bodhisattva/deity manifestation) vs. folk-Daoist immortal transformation motifs (thần tiên biến hóa) | Never use hóa thân for Mark 9:2-8. Keep biến hình paired with vocabulary of unveiling/revealing pre-existing glory (“sự vinh hiển đã có từ trước được bày ra”), not vocabulary of becoming something new. |
| Soul/life vocabulary | mạng sống (physical life, preferred default) vs. linh hồn (soul, carries transmigration/rebirth associations) | Reserve linh hồn only for contexts unmistakably emphasizing the immaterial, eternal dimension, and always pair it with a guarding phrase preventing a reincarnation-adjacent reading. Default to mạng sống in 8:35-37 and 10:45. |
| Hell/judgment cluster | hỏa ngục (Gehenna, final judgment) vs. Vietnamese Buddhist đa-tầng địa ngục cosmology (multiple temporary hells preceding rebirth) | Never use bare địa ngục unqualified; hỏa ngục must always be introduced with “sự đoán phạt đời đời” (eternal judgment) language nearby to block a purgatorial/rebirth-stage reading. |
| Temple/church cluster | đền thờ (Temple building) vs. Hội Thánh (Church, baseline) vs. đền (folk temple to a deified hero, already forbidden by baseline for Hội Thánh) | đền thờ is historically specific to the Jerusalem building and must never be used for, nor allowed to bleed associations into, Hội Thánh. Since đền thờ shares the syllable đền with the forbidden folk-temple term, a brief clarifying gloss at first occurrence (11:11) is recommended even though đền thờ itself is an established, correct Bible term. |
| Family/kinship cluster | anh em / mẹ (spiritual family, Mark 3:31-35) vs. the weight of Confucian blood-family obligation (đạo hiếu, huyết thống) | Frame explicitly as gracious inclusion into God’s family, never as rejection of or superiority over blood family, paralleling the baseline’s caution on Adoption (sự làm con nuôi) and Father (Cha). |
| Tradition/filial-duty cluster | truyền thống (tradition, Mark 7) / Cô-ban (Corban) vs. general reverence for ancestral custom | Restrict the critique explicitly to “tradition that overrides God’s commandment” (7:8-13), never to filial duty or ancestral custom as such; required translator note at 7:9-13. |
3. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decision Log
| Term | Decision | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Σατανᾶς (Satan) | Transliterate: Sa-tan | No adequate single native equivalent; transliteration already standard in Vietnamese Protestant usage; avoids folk-spirit-category conflation that a descriptive paraphrase might invite. |
| Βεελζεβούλ (Beelzebul) | Transliterate: Bê-ên-xê-bun | Proper name; no translation possible or needed; low ambiguity. |
| Κορβάν (Corban) | Transliterate: Cô-ban | Technical vow-term with no Vietnamese equivalent; transliteration plus explanatory note preserves the specific legal-religious mechanism Jesus critiques. |
| Λεγιών (Legion) | Transliterate: Lê-ghi-ôn | Proper name (self-identification of the demonic horde) referencing a Roman military unit; transliteration preserves the narrative’s numerical shock value untranslatable by a Vietnamese common noun. |
| Πάσχα (Passover) | Paraphrase/established term: Lễ Vượt Qua | Existing, well-established Vietnamese Bible term (“Feast of Passing Over”); no transliteration needed; already carries the Exodus-deliverance meaning descriptively. |
| ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο (Incarnation, applied conceptually to Mark 10:45 “came”) | Paraphrase (baseline compound): Ngôi Lời trở nên xác thịt | Reused from Romans baseline; a single-word coinage or transliteration would either default to hóa thân (forbidden) or produce an opaque neologism; the descriptive compound is doctrinally load-bearing and must not be shortened. |
| λύτρον (ransom) | Paraphrase (compound): giá chuộc | No transliteration is possible for a common Greek noun; paraphrase via compounding (giá = price + chuộc = redeem/buy back) isolates the commercial-manumission sense while avoiding the merit-laden chuộc tội. |
| ἀντί (substitution) | Paraphrase: thay cho | Grammatical particle; transliteration is meaningless; paraphrase must be more explicit than the default “cho” to preserve the exchange sense. |
| υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (Son of Man) | Paraphrase (established Bible title): Con Người | Already fixed in Vietnamese Bible tradition; transliteration is not applicable to a descriptive Semitic title; paraphrase must be capitalized consistently as a proper title, not read as the generic common noun. |
| δαιμόνιον / πνεῦμα ἀκάθαρτον | Paraphrase: quỷ / tà linh ô uế | Established, descriptive Vietnamese Bible vocabulary already lexically distinct from thần linh; no transliteration warranted or available. |
| Ἀββά (Abba) | Transliterate (retained, per baseline): Áp-ba | Aramaic term of intimacy Paul/Mark deliberately preserve untranslated even in the Greek text; Vietnamese should likewise preserve the transliteration alongside Cha rather than paraphrase it away. |
| Μεσσίας / Χριστός (Messiah/Christ) | Transliterate + established term (per baseline): Đấng Mê-si-a / Đấng Christ | Already fixed; no paraphrase risk since Vietnamese has no rival messianic figure. |
| βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων (King of the Jews) | Paraphrase (established Bible phrase): Vua dân Giu-đa | Fully translatable, already standard; transliteration inapplicable to a descriptive royal title. |
| κεφαλὴ γωνίας (cornerstone) | Paraphrase (established Bible metaphor): đá đầu góc nhà | Standard architectural metaphor with a settled Vietnamese Bible rendering; no transliteration needed. |
| βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως (abomination of desolation) | Paraphrase + footnote: sự tàn nát gớm ghiếc | Fully descriptive translation is possible and preferred; the doctrinal risk lies in missing the Daniel background, addressed by footnote rather than by transliteration. |
General principle applied throughout: transliteration is reserved for proper names and untranslatable Semitic/Aramaic technical terms with no native semantic content (Sa-tan, Bê-ên-xê-bun, Cô-ban, Lê-ghi-ôn, Áp-ba, Mê-si-a); paraphrase (including compound coinages) is used wherever the underlying concept, though foreign, is expressible through existing Vietnamese morphemes without triggering an unwanted doctrinal association — and where paraphrase alone would trigger such an association (giá chuộc, thay cho, Con Người, Ngôi Lời trở nên xác thịt), the paraphrase is fixed as an exact compound with no permitted shortening.
4. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities
Ranked by (a) doctrinal centrality to the core passage Mark 10:35-45, (b) severity of potential syncretism if mistranslated, and (c) how easily an unwary translator could default to the wrong Vietnamese term.
- λύτρον / “ransom” → giá chuộc vs. chuộc tội (merit-based redemption). The single highest-stakes ambiguity in the curriculum: Mark 10:45 is the doctrinal center of the whole book and the anchor of “The Ransom for Many.” A drift toward chuộc tội’s ambient merit-transfer connotation would silently convert substitutionary atonement into self-directed or communal merit-generation — the exact inversion of the doctrine.
- ἀντί / “for” → thay cho vs. bare cho. If translators default to unmarked “cho,” Mark 10:45 reads as “gave his life for the benefit of many” rather than “in place of many,” quietly erasing the substitutionary logic that gives the ransom its force.
- δοῦλος / “slave” → tôi mọi vs. a softened social-hierarchy reading. Vietnamese social history (household servitude, colonial-era labor terms) could pull tôi mọi toward a status-marker reading, losing Mark 10:44’s radical demand for total self-surrender modeled on Christ himself (v.45).
- κατακυριεύω/κατεξουσιάζω vs. κύριος/ἐξουσία → cai trị/cầm quyền vs. Chúa/quyền phép. Shared roots create real bleed-through risk; if a translator or reader lets the negative and positive senses blur, Mark 10:42-45’s entire rhetorical strategy (worldly domination vs. Christ’s servant-Lordship) collapses.
- δαιμόνιον/πνεῦμα ἀκάθαρτον vs. bare thần linh. Highest-frequency risk across the whole Gospel (7+ chapters); a single lapse into unqualified thần linh in any exorcism narrative risks assimilating Christ’s decisive authority into the ongoing, negotiable folk spirit-world framework Vietnamese readers already inhabit.
- ποτήριον / “cup” → chén, unfenced. Direct collision with ancestor-veneration libation practice; without a note, Mark 10:38-39 and 14:23-24,36 risk being heard as one more ritual cup-offering rather than Christ’s unique appointed suffering.
- ἀνάστασις / “resurrection” → sự sống lại vs. đầu thai/luân hồi. Already Critical in the Romans baseline; equally load-bearing in Mark, especially across the three Passion predictions (8:31; 9:31; 10:34) that directly frame 10:35-45.
- υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου / “Son of Man” → Con Người read as the generic noun. Without consistent capitalization and Daniel 7 footnoting, the title’s exalted-authority dimension (essential to holding the Messianic Secret’s paradox open at 10:45) simply disappears into ordinary Vietnamese usage.
- ψυχή / “life” → mạng sống vs. linh hồn. Mark 10:45 itself (“gave his life”) requires mạng sống; a drift to linh hồn risks a reincarnation-adjacent reading precisely at the ransom’s climactic statement.
- δόξα / “glory” → sự vinh hiển, James and John’s request (10:37). Risk that readers side with the disciples’ worldly-triumph expectation of glory rather than recognizing Jesus’ redefinition of glory through the cross (immediately following, 10:38-45); requires surrounding context, not a lexical fix.
- αἷμα / “blood” (covenant) → huyết vs. colloquial máu. Register slippage to máu in atonement contexts (14:24) would weaken the formal sacrificial-covenantal resonance that must echo back to “for many” in 10:45.
- μυστήριον / “mystery” → sự mầu nhiệm vs. bí truyền/huyền bí. Governs how the whole Messianic Secret doctrine is perceived; a slip toward esoteric-initiation vocabulary would recast grace-given revelation as merit-earned or lineage-transmitted secret knowledge.
- παραδίδωμι / “hand over/betray” → phản vs. phó/bị nộp collapsed into one term. If translators pick only one Vietnamese verb throughout Mark 14, either Judas’s culpability or the Father’s sovereign purpose is lost, weakening “The Necessity of the Cross.”
- ἔθνη at Mark 10:42 → dân ngoại without the generic-sense note. Retained per glossary for lexical consistency, but carries real risk of readers importing the Jew-Gentile salvation-historical category into a verse that is actually about worldly political rulers in general.
- βάπτισμα (metaphorical, 10:38-39) → phép báp-têm without disambiguation. Risk that James and John’s exchange with Jesus is misread as a question about the literal water rite rather than Christ inviting them to share his coming suffering and death.
5. Full-Book Chapter Coverage Confirmation
Every chapter of Mark has been reviewed for gap-analysis purposes. Chapters not listed with new gap-relevant material in Sections 1-4 are confirmed here as reviewed with no additional linguistic gap beyond what is already recorded in 07_semantic_analysis.md and 08_core_glossary.md.
| Chapter | Gap-Analysis Status |
|---|---|
| 1 | Reviewed — contributes: authority (exousia), demon/unclean spirit cluster, leprosy, repentance. Fully covered above (Sections 1.7, 2.2). |
| 2 | Reviewed — contributes: Son of Man (first occurrence), bridegroom, fasting, Sabbath. Covered above (Sections 1.6, 2.1, 3). |
| 3 | Reviewed — contributes: blasphemy, spiritual family, Beelzebul/Satan pairing. Covered above (Sections 1.5/1.6/1.7, 2.2, 3). |
| 4 | Reviewed — contributes: mystery, parable, nature-obedience. Covered above (Sections 1.6, 2.1, 2.2). |
| 5 | Reviewed — contributes: Legion, healing/salvation ambiguity (sōzō). Covered above (Sections 1.7, 2.2, 3). |
| 6 | Reviewed — contributes: sending (apostellō), prophet-without-honor. No additional gap beyond Section 1.7/1.2; confirmed reviewed-no-new-gap. |
| 7 | Reviewed — contributes: tradition, defilement, Corban. Covered above (Sections 1.7, 2.2, 3). |
| 8 | Reviewed — contributes: cross (first occurrence), life/soul (psychē), Messiah confession structural turn. Covered above (Sections 1.4, 1.6, 2.1, 2.2, 4). |
| 9 | Reviewed — contributes: transfiguration, Gehenna, unbelief. Covered above (Sections 1.1, 2.2). |
| 10 | Reviewed — core passage chapter. Contributes the highest-density gap cluster in the curriculum: ransom, substitution, cup, baptism (metaphorical), servant/slave pair, lord-over/authority-over pair, eternal life, Son of David. Fully covered across all sections; this chapter is the analytical center of the document. |
| 11 | Reviewed — contributes: temple (building), fig tree sign-act. Covered above (Sections 1.2, 2.2). |
| 12 | Reviewed — contributes: cornerstone, Son of David (continued), widow. No new gap beyond Sections 1.6/3; confirmed reviewed-no-additional-gap beyond what is logged. |
| 13 | Reviewed — contributes: tribulation, abomination of desolation, vigilance. Covered above (Section 3); election (baseline term) reused without new gap. |
| 14 | Reviewed — contributes: Passover, blood, betrayal (paradidōmi), denial, Abba/cup (continued). Covered above (Sections 1.4, 2.2, 3, 4). |
| 15 | Reviewed — contributes: King of the Jews, temple veil, cross (continued). Covered above (Sections 1.4, 3, 4). |
| 16 | Reviewed — contributes: signs (sēmeia, longer ending), resurrection (climactic occurrence). No new gap beyond Section 4 item 7 (resurrection already fully treated); confirmed reviewed-no-additional-gap. |
End of Linguistic Gap Analysis. This document, together with 08_core_glossary.md, forms the required input for the Phase 1 Step 9+ update to translation_memory.json and bible_term_registry.json for the Mark curriculum, and for the eventual Mark-specific extension of 12_ai_translation_requirements.md.