Accepted by the off. grammar what does {zu'enai} mean?
If zukte2 always refers to the action/free will of zukte1 then {zu'e mi viska ko'a} is expanded into {mi zukte lo nu mi viska ko'a}.
Okay, if this is fine then we have
{zu'e mi viska ko'a} = I intentionally (via a free will) see ko'a.
It's somewhat similar to "I watch" but not in the sense of {catlu} which is more about "to look (ptobably, not limited to vision)".
However, the antonym of {zukte lo ka viska} is something like "to catch the eye/eye-catching".
{zu'enai mi viska ko'a} = Something caught my eye.
Is it really so? Because if {zu'enai} = {fi'o na zukte} then it expands into {mi na zukte lo ka viska ko'a} which doesn't state whether I saw ko'a or not.
May be it should be expanded into {mi na'e zukte lo ka viska}? Then it'd make more sense.
Or may be it's magical focus that when being changed putting {viska} to the main clause changes the meaning drastically?
Where is my mistake?