tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Oct 21 10:04:00 2013

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Story: ghuv = The Recruit - 53

Robyn Stewart ( [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

Interesting take. I have used the verb this way for so many years that it's
hard to think of it not being correct. I think the restorers of paghmo' tIn
mIS read it the same as I do, so I have additional company. 

Would you prefer mIS torgh yab?

- Qov

-----Original Message-----
From: De'vID [] 
Sent: October 21, 2013 9:03 AM
To: tlhIngan-Hol
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Story: ghuv = The Recruit - 53

>>> mIS torgh. = Torgh is confused.

>> I don't think {mIS} can be used in this way

> I DO think {mIS} can be used in this way.  :-)
> qayajbe'mo jImIS.
> Unless we have an example, we might never know. On the other hand, I 
> am not a native english speaker, so if there is any evidence that "to be
mixed up"
> is not an emotional state, then it makes clear what is intended with 
> "confused". If not, I'd accept any use that makes sense.

Here is how it's defined in TKD:

mIS - be confused, mixed up (v)

confused, be confused (v) - mIS
mixed up, be mixed up, be confused (v) - mIS

The English word "be confused" has several meanings, e.g., (1) being in a
state of mental perplexity ("she was confused by the instructions"), (2) not
clearly organised or expressed ("his argument is quite confused"), (3)
mistaken for one another ("the twins are often confused [with each other]").
These are different concepts which don't necessarily map to the same word in
another language.

An English speaker would not look up "mixed up" to find the Klingon word to
describe someone in a state of mental perplexity. To me, that makes it
fairly clear that the definition "be confused, mixed up" is intended to
clarify that the sense of "be confused" used is that of things being
confused for (i.e., "mixed up" with) one another, rather than in the sense
of mental perplexity. If the mental state had been intended, I would've
expected the definition to say "be confused, perplexed". If the logical
disorganisation sense had been intended, I'd have expected "be confused,

> In addition to the simple quality {mIS} "be confused, be mixed up" we have
the homophonous noun {mIS} "confusion" and the causative verb {mISmoH}
"confuse".  I know of no examples in canon, but I think Qov used it

It wouldn't surprise me if Marc Okrand had deliberately written the
definitions in such a way as to confuse the reader. :-)

> De'vID may have mixed up {mIS} with {DuD} "mix, stir" (v) - also used by
some for "shuffle [cards] (i.e. in {poQ'ar} poker).  A {DuDwI'} is a
"stirring stick" (used in cooking; cf. KGT 97) and I wouldn't reject
*{DuDmeH maHpIn} for "mixing bowl" if I saw it.

Nope. To "mix, stir" and to "mix up, confuse" are quite distinct concepts to

{mIS torgh torghen je} "Torg and Torgen are mixed up (someone mistook one of
them for the other)"
{torgh torghen je luDuDlu'} "Torg and Torgen are mixed (someone threw their
body parts into a blender)"


Tlhingan-hol mailing list

Tlhingan-hol mailing list

Back to archive top level