I agree that there is no case where it could have the meaning of "imitator," except in 1Pe 3:13. There it could make sense, which appears to be the reason why, when a Greek translator looked at the original Aramaic word Peter used, Tanana, looked at the context, and thinking that Peter meant imitator, chose the word mimitai in his translation. This meaning got passed down into the texts we have today with this reading, the 1550 Stephens Textus Receptus, the 1894 Scrivener Textus Receptus, and the Byzantine Majority Text. That is why I do not understand your assertion that there is no example of Tanana translated as mimetai in the NT. These 3 families of manuscripts provide us with that exact example in 1Pe 3:13.
The Aramaic Tanana, with those 2 meanings, easily explains the reason for the two Greek words used, mimetai and zelotai. That is what I am trying to establish, is that when you have 2 totally different words from the Greek in a series of manuscripts, and there happens to be a word in Aramaic which has both of those meanings, then we can deduce that the Greek was the translation from the original Aramaic word, with different translators choosing different meanings for the original Aramaic word. That is not the only explanation, but it does at least deserve to be considered.
I will await any response you may have for either this post, or post 9, before moving on.