On 29 Sep 2014 04:45, "TR NS" <tran...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sunday, September 28, 2014 11:17:43 PM UTC-4, la durka wrote:
>> la selpa'i has some discussion in the second half of this post.
>
>
> Thank you, so much. THAT is an explanation. I finally understand {voi}.
>
> So, where as {poi} is an "identifier", narrowing down the possible identity of the referent, {voi} is a "qualifier". It doesn't restrict the identity, but selects the quality of the referent that makes it pertinent. Another translations besides simply "as" might be "in so far as".That is a different proposal than the one for using /voi/ for {poi'i}, which is the one you hadn't understood.
It struck me as quite reasonable and understandable that you, newish to these topics, didn't understand that proposal, but not that you blamed the proposer for that.