Date:  Sat, 6 Dec 1997 13:20:14 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199712061820.NAA03483@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      ca'a/pu'i
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
Content-Length: 492
X-From-Space-Date: Sat Dec  6 13:20:15 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

Lojbab:
>>>[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}.
 >
>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.

Isn't {ca'a} = "actually occurs" and {pu'i} = "actually occurred"?
How can they not relate to whether the event actually occurs?

co'o mi'e xorxes