[102486] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] nuqDaq ghaH 'arHa'e'?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick)
Sat Nov 21 10:26:23 2015
From: Rohan Fenwick <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 01:26:08 +1000
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmNuo6U+QQS00ZKYsSuRwLL_-LsuJqo9gj0Yjn2fpq0Fuw@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============3229687870361962834==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_409bc924-de1c-4d3a-92b6-e6292ef631c5_"
--_409bc924-de1c-4d3a-92b6-e6292ef631c5_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
ghItlhpu' De'vID=2C jatlh:
> {mIS} v. be confused=2C mixed up
> {missing verb} v. be confused=2C perplexed
(poD vay')
> I recognise that most KLI mailing list members consider {mIS} to mean
> "be confused=2C mentally perplexed" by what ghuchu'wI' called "twenty
> years of consistent usage" in the thread that I linked. I just think
> that those people who have assumed that's what it means have missed a
> joke that's obvious to people who speak languages where the two senses
> of "be confused" map to different words=2C and have "confused" two
> definitions of the word in a way that underlies the joke (and they are
> "confused"). A literal reading of the definition doesn't imply mental
> confusion. That's an extension of the given meaning. Perhaps Klingons
> have the same idiom in this instance as American English speakers=2C but
> that's "not canon".
Like ghunchu'wI'=2C I disagree=2C and think you're reading too much into th=
at secondary gloss. An important point to remember is not just that America=
n English speakers are making this interpretation=2C but also that Marc Okr=
and himself is a native speaker of American English. Since he's the one who=
wrote TKD=2C it's entirely reasonable to take the natural American English=
interpretation of a TKD gloss. In this instance=2C "mixed up" is a phrasal=
adjective also firmly linked with the idea of mental confusion=2C perplexi=
ty or bewilderment in English (not just American=2C but more generally)=2C =
and Google Ngrams yields robust examples going back at least a century wher=
e the sense is very clearly mental. I couldn't help smiling at this example=
from 1899 that's quite on point:
"It is hard when you are learning a different language to your own=2C you g=
et mixed up=2C and there are such a lot of peculiarities in French=2C and i=
f you do not put your heart into it you will never learn." (Child Life=2C v=
ol. 1/2=2C 1899)
(Comme en fran=E7ais=2C c'est en klingon=2C n'est-ce pas?)
As such=2C I don't think it at all likely that physical disarray or disorde=
r is the primary sense of the=0A=
word {mIS}=2C and I believe it's erroneous to rely on the gloss of "mixed =
up" to argue that such is the case. That's not to say that I couldn't still=
be proven wrong=2C of course=2C and it's also not to discount the point yo=
u make about some conventions being a matter of historical accident among K=
lingon speakers. (Though even there=2C my experience is that many of us sti=
ll do tend to vacillate on matters where it's known there's no clear canon =
support - gawd knows I wouldn't like to be pinned down on an opinion as to =
the appropriate syntax of {HuS} "hang".) But ultimately=2C I think that {=
=8BmIS=9Bmo' mach mIS}.
QeS 'utlh
=
--_409bc924-de1c-4d3a-92b6-e6292ef631c5_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px=3B
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt=3B
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'><div dir=3D'ltr'>ghItlhpu' De'vID=2C jatlh:<br>&g=
t=3B {mIS} v. be confused=2C mixed up<br><div>>=3B {missing verb} v. be c=
onfused=2C perplexed<br><br>(poD vay')<br><br>>=3B I recognise that most =
KLI mailing list members consider {mIS} to mean<br>>=3B "be confused=2C m=
entally perplexed" by what ghuchu'wI' called "twenty<br>>=3B years of con=
sistent usage" in the thread that I linked. I just think<br>>=3B that tho=
se people who have assumed that's what it means have missed a<br>>=3B jok=
e that's obvious to people who speak languages where the two senses<br>>=
=3B of "be confused" map to different words=2C and have "confused" two<br>&=
gt=3B definitions of the word in a way that underlies the joke (and they ar=
e<br>>=3B "confused"). A literal reading of the definition doesn't imply =
mental<br>>=3B confusion. That's an extension of the given meaning. Perha=
ps Klingons<br>>=3B have the same idiom in this instance as American Engl=
ish speakers=2C but<br>>=3B that's "not canon".<br><br>Like ghunchu'wI'=
=2C I disagree=2C and think you're reading too much into that secondary glo=
ss. An important point to remember is not just that American English speake=
rs are making this interpretation=2C but also that Marc Okrand himself is a=
native speaker of American English. Since he's the one who wrote TKD=2C it=
's entirely reasonable to take the natural American English interpretation =
of a TKD gloss. In this instance=2C "mixed up" is a phrasal adjective also =
firmly linked with the idea of mental confusion=2C perplexity or bewilderme=
nt in English (not just American=2C but more generally)=2C and Google Ngram=
s yields robust examples going back at least a century where the sense is v=
ery clearly mental. I couldn't help smiling at this example from 1899 that'=
s quite on point:<br><br>"It is hard when you are learning a different lang=
uage to your own=2C you get <b>mixed up</b>=2C and there are such a lot of =
peculiarities in French=2C and if you do not put your heart into it you wil=
l never learn." (Child Life=2C vol. 1/2=2C 1899)<br><br>(Comme en fran=E7ai=
s=2C c'est en klingon=2C n'est-ce pas?)<br><br>As such=2C I don't think it =
at all likely that physical disarray or disorder is the primary sense of th=
e=0A=
word {mIS}=2C and I believe it's erroneous to rely on the gloss of "mixed =
up" to argue that such is the case. That's not to say that I couldn't still=
be proven wrong=2C of course=2C and it's also not to discount the point yo=
u make about some conventions being a matter of historical accident among K=
lingon speakers. (Though even there=2C my experience is that many of us sti=
ll do tend to vacillate on matters where it's known there's no clear canon =
support - gawd knows I wouldn't like to be pinned down on an opinion as to =
the appropriate syntax of {HuS} "hang".) But ultimately=2C I think that {=
=8BmIS=9Bmo' mach mIS}.<br><br>QeS 'utlh<br></div> </div></body>
</html>=
--_409bc924-de1c-4d3a-92b6-e6292ef631c5_--
--===============3229687870361962834==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============3229687870361962834==--
