Edit 'en_tn_47-1CO.tsv' using 'tc-create-app'

en_tn_47-1CO.tsv

@@ -1106,6 +1106,7 @@ Book	Chapter	Verse	ID	SupportReference	OrigQuote	Occurrence	GLQuote	OccurrenceNo
 1CO	9	4	mr4g	figs-rquestion	μὴ οὐκ ἔχομεν ἐξουσίαν φαγεῖν καὶ πεῖν?	1	Do we not have the right to eat and drink?	Paul does not ask this question because he is looking for information. Rather, he asks it to involve the Corinthians in what he is arguing. The question assumes that the answer is “yes, you do.” If your readers would misunderstand this question, you could express the idea with a strong affirmation. Alternate translation: “We most definitely have the right to eat and to drink.” (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-rquestion]])
 1CO	9	4	ninf	figs-doublenegatives	μὴ οὐκ	1	Do we not have the right to eat and drink?	The words translated **certainly not** are two negative words. In Paul’s culture, two negative words made the statement even more negative. English speakers would misunderstand two negatives, so the ULT expresses the idea with one strong negative. If your language can use two negatives as Paul’s culture did, you could use a double negative here. If your language does not use two negatives in this way, you could translate with one strong negative, as the ULT does. Alternate translation: “by no means” (See: rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-doublenegatives)
 1CO	9	4	p4vq	figs-exclusive	ἔχομεν	1	we … have	Here, **we** refers to Paul and Barnabas (see [9:6](../09/06.md)). It does not include the Corinthians. (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-exclusive]])
+1CO	9	4	h0c3	figs-abstractnouns	ἔχομεν ἐξουσίαν	1	we … have	If your language does not use an abstract noun for the idea behind **right**, you could express the idea by using a verbal phrase such as “are able to” or “can require.” Alternate translation: “Are we … not able to” (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-abstractnouns]])
 1CO	9	4	i6tk	figs-metonymy	φαγεῖν καὶ πεῖν	1	we … have	Here, **to eat and to drink** refers not primarily to the physical process of “eating” and “drinking.” Rather, the phrase refers primarily to what is needed **to eat and to drink**, that is, food and drink. Paul is saying that he and Barnabas have **the right** to receive food and drink so that they can **eat** and **drink**. If your readers would misunderstand **to eat and to drink**, you could clarify that Paul refers to “food” and “drink.” Alternate translation: “to receive food to eat and beverages to drink” (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-metonymy]])
 1CO	9	5	s9k8	figs-rquestion	μὴ οὐκ ἔχομεν ἐξουσίαν ἀδελφὴν, γυναῖκα περιάγειν, ὡς καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι, καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ τοῦ Κυρίου, καὶ Κηφᾶς?	1	Do we not have the right to take along with us a wife who is a believer, as do the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?	Paul uses a question to emphasize that he knows the Corinthians agree with what he is saying. Alternate translation: “If we have believing wives, we have a right to take them with us just as the other apostles take them, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas.” (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-rquestion]])
 1CO	9	6	wx1p	figs-rquestion	ἢ μόνος ἐγὼ καὶ Βαρναβᾶς, οὐκ ἔχομεν ἐξουσίαν μὴ ἐργάζεσθαι?	1	Or is it only Barnabas and I who do not have the right not to work?	Paul is shaming the Corinthians. Alternate translation: “You seem to think that the only people you think need to work to earn money are Barnabas and me.” (See: [[rc://en/ta/man/translate/figs-rquestion]])