[Tlhingan-hol] nuqDaq ghaH 'arHa'e'?

[lojmIt tI'wI' nuv]

Your reference to an earlier discussion points to a single message by you, which hardly seems conclusive to anyone but perhaps you. The form of the gloss, "be confused" suggests that it is likely a verb that can be adjectival, like "be big" or "be red, orange". These words generally don't take direct objects. You can't "be red" something. 

The twins in your example might be often confused (for each other by someone else) but that confusion requires a third party as the agent of the confusion. The twins aren't actually doing anything. You are using the passive voice to hide the subject. No subject similarly be red something. But someone else must be in a state of confusion over the identity of the twins. 

I'm with Qov on this one. I think the ONLY acceptable interpretation of {mIS} is to be in a state of mental confusion. 

Sent from my iPad
lojmIt tI'wI' nuv

> On Nov 20, 2015, at 3:04 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> qunnoQ HoD:
>> I came to realize that all knowledge concerning tlhIngan Hol,can be
>> categorized in two groups :
>> 
>> Canon Klingon
>> Non Canon Klingon
>> 
>> And these two categories,could be further described as such :
>> 
>> Canon Klingon : Purity
>> Non Canon Klingon : Crap
> 
> It's a good idea to keep as strictly to canon as possible, but reality
> isn't so clear cut and there are a few grey areas.
> 
> For example, Marc Okrand has written some Klingon which isn't
> considered canon. He often accompanies his signature with a phrase in
> Klingon when signing a book. Those phrases aren't considered canon.
> Actually, he's made a mistake at least once when writing these phrases
> (which he himself recognised was a mistake). He's also spoken a number
> of phrases which he's used as examples when explaining a concept, but
> they're not considered canon since they're not written down or
> printed.
> 
> There are also some conventions which have developed among Klingon
> speakers which aren't strictly canon. For example, almost everyone
> accepts that {mIS} can mean mentally confused or perplexed, though its
> definition is "be confused, mixed up". I interpret it only in the
> literal sense of things being mixed up or confused for one another,
> though what I think of as an English idiomatic meaning has seeped so
> thoroughly into the Klingon that I don't normally bother pointing this
> out when someone else uses it in that sense.
> 
> There was a discussion about this on the mailing list earlier:
> http://www.kli.org/activities/email-discussion-group/?tlhy=2013&tlhm=October&tlhp=msg00095.html
> 
> qunnoQ HoD:
>> So,I finally decided that :
>> 
>> a. study comes first
>> b. application of knowledge gained,always within the strict boundaries of
>> canon follows
>> c. if questions remain ---> research,research,research !
>> d. if questions still remain unanswered,then and *only* then post in KLBC
>> 
>> Of course all these are just my conclusions,and yes I may be wrong ; I just
>> wanted to share my thoughts !
> 
> I would suggest that if you had questions, go ahead and post them to
> KLBC whatever the outcome of your research. The canon is rather
> scattered, and there are people here who are so much more familiar
> with the canon than you are that they can easily point out things that
> you've missed, even if you think you've been thorough.
> 
> qunnoQ HoD:
>> Qov lojmIt tI' wI' nuv je, veqlargh bochenmoHpu' !
>> (I didn't find a word for <<monster>> so I chose {veqlargh})
> 
> When Klingons make a mistake, they sometimes (as a social convention)
> blame {veqlargh}. There's an expression, {HIvqa' veqlargh} "The
> Fek'lhr strikes again!", which Klingons will sometimes say when, e.g.,
> dropping their food by accident. So "creating a Fek'lhr" is perhaps
> not the best metaphor to use to describe teaching someone well.
> 
> -- 
> De'vID
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol