Re: [lojban] zi'o and modals

[Richard Todd <richardt@flash.net>]

John Cowan wrote:
> Thus if mi klama zo'e, then mi klama zi'o.  The converse need not
> be true, though.

You've lost me there.  Can you elaborate on why this is true?

I thought:
{zo'e} is an elided value that you can assume is unimportant.  Not only
does it exist, but whatever value it has makes the sentence true.

So, I don't see how {mi klama zo'e} implies {mi klama zi'o}, or the
converse.  One has an unspecified,  unimportant destination, and the
other is a kind of going that has no destination (zi'o deleted it).

Right?