[tlhIngan Hol] Source of {magh} v. "indicate, reveal"?

[De'vID]

On Oct 26, 2017 23:33, "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:



On Oct 1, 2017 00:50, "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:



On 28 September 2017 at 19:06, Steven Boozer <sboozer at uchicago.edu> wrote:

> magh            indicate,  reveal (v)
>

What do you have as the source of this definition? I am trying to verify
this definition.


Anyone? I'm almost convinced that this is an error (or perhaps a trap,
since the TKD definition of {magh} is "betray"). My notes claim it's a
possible typo, with the source as Star Trek: Communicator. However, the
text I have of STC issue #104, which is the only issue I'm aware of where
new vocabulary was revealed, does not have this listed.

What is the origin of this definition?


Curiously, the KLI new words list have {magh} listed as "betray", but with
the origin given as "MSN and HolQeD v5n3p15 - S26".

https://www.kli.org/about-klingon/new-klingon-words/m/

Indeed, the word is *used* in SkyBox card 26, the content of which is
printed in HolQeD 5:3. But I checked TKD and this isn't a new word. It's in
TKD (and not the Addendum).

Did someone deliberately introduce an error in the KLI new words list
(using the word {magh} "betray") to catch copiers? If so, naughty naughty.

-- 
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20171026/654db2e6/attachment-0016.htm>