Re: partial instantiations (was: Re: GLI Re: do all nu's happen?)

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>And:
>>[I don't know what the difference between ca`a and pu`i is.]
>
>Something to do with tenses, I suppose: {ca'a} contains an
>implied {ca} and {pu'i} an implied {pu}.


Perhaps, but then these can be used with explicit tenses other than those
and not change their meaning.

The answer is that ca'a and pu'i are orthogonal to standard tense usage.
They relate to potentiality of an event to occur, and not whether it actually
occurs.

We should ask pc explicitl to give examples of course if we REALLY wantto
know the difference.  But my guess would bne that your ball falling off the
table that does not make it to the floor is NOT an example of ca'a farlu
even if it is an example of ca farlu.  pu'i of course refers to the
capability having been actually demonstrated in the past.  Thius is
somehwat similar to ba'o, except that ba;o presumes that the usage is
taking place in an aftermath directly relevant to the event itself.
If we were to talk about asteroids striking the earth, this is certainly pu'i
but it would be an odd situation to talk about the present as ba'o lenu janli

lojbab