Across literature, the term "misinterpret" is often employed to underscore the delicate balance between what an author intends to convey and what a reader might mistakenly take away. For instance, Rabelais [1] and Goethe [2] use the term as an admonishment to ensure that the listener or reader fully grasps the precise meaning behind the words, urging a correct comprehension of their intentions. Similarly, Congreve [3] employs the term, albeit in a more direct, personal rebuke, to emphasize the potential for misunderstanding even straightforward criticism. In contrast, Santayana [4] and Forster [5] illustrate that the risk of misinterpretation sometimes arises unintentionally, either from the inherent ambiguity in indirect symptoms or from a misaligned pursuit of abstract ideals. Dickens [6] further adds a nuanced layer by suggesting that a deliberate restraint in self-expression might be necessary to prevent one’s natural inclinations from being misconstrued. Together, these examples reveal a common literary preoccupation: the tension between clarity and misunderstanding in the communication of ideas.