X-Digest-Num: 198
Message-ID: <44114.198.1082.959273824@eGroups.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 14:33:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Spigot <spigot@neuron.net>
Subject: question
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 1082
Content-Length: 692
Lines: 21

i'm trying to understand CAhA, its tricky.  the book sayson pg 243
that "lojban bridi without tense markers may not necessarily refer
to actual events: they may also refer to capabilities or potential
events."

if this is true, then a huge number of bridi that are said to be
"obviously" false are not, like
  lo nanmu cu ninmu
or
  lo'e glipre cu xabju le fi'ortu'a

aren't these bridi true because men are in fact capable of being women,
(they could prehaps get an operation), and the english are capable of
typically living in Africa (perhaps they all move there).

it seems that unless you specifically use <ca'a>, then your bridi
is true in some sense...   is this right?