Implement all LIFT import fields for better protection

[imnasnainaec]

Resolves #1750

Most changes based on https://github.com/sillsdev/FieldWorks/blob/release/9.1/Src/LexText/LexTextControls/LiftMerger.cs
Examples of things from FLEx's LiftMerger that are NOT implemented here:

• EntryWasDeleted
• ProcessFieldDefinition
• the m_* fields
• the various private helper functions
  • MakeSafeLiftMultiText
  • GetOptionalDateTime
  • GetGuidInExtensible
  • FillInExtensibleElementsFromRawXml
  • ...

This change is 

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 84.31373% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 74.49%. Comparing base (0b714f4) to head (8fa670b).
Report is 36 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
Backend/Services/LiftService.cs	83.72%	2 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
...ergeDuplicates/MergeDupsStep/protectReasonUtils.ts	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3531      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   74.51%   74.49%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         285      285              
  Lines       11013    11025      +12     
  Branches     1335     1345      +10     
==========================================
+ Hits         8206     8213       +7     
- Misses       2424     2426       +2     
- Partials      383      386       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	83.74% <86.00%> (-0.05%)	⬇️
frontend	66.32% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[jasonleenaylor]

In the context of this PR I can't tell how a protected sense due to pronunciation detail would interact with a user adding audio. I'll try to remember to explore that in QA after merging.

Reviewed 5 of 7 files at r1, 2 of 2 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @imnasnainaec)