irrealis

[ucleaar <ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk>]

I have changed my mind about everything being realis except duhu.
What did it was

   I described a book

"A book" can be interpreted in at least four ways:
  specific and real
  nonspecific and real
  specific and irreal (i.e. not necessarily real; real or non-real)
  nonspecific and irreal
If it is real then you can verify the assertion by inspecting the
universe: if you find a/the book described by me then the statement it
true & if you don't then it's false. This doesn't work if "a book"
is irreal. "I described a book" can be true even if no book described
by me exists in this universe. Instead, I suggest, we have to inspect
each member of an infinite set of universes: in one or more of these
universes we may find a book described (in this universe) by me.
So, how to show that this book is drawn not from the set of all books
in this universe but from the set of all books in any universe? I
came up with:

   mi skicu le/lo dahi cukta

It becomes easy to apply this to events:

   mi troci lo nu mi klama         "I manage to go"
   mi troci lo dahi nu mi klama    "I try to go"

   mi nitcu lo nu mi klama         "I need to go [& I do go]"
   mi nitcu lo dahi nu mi klama    "I need to go [but may not]"

and more generally:

   mi nitcu lo cukta               "Ex, x is book in this universe
                                    & I need x"
   mi nitcu lo dahi cukta          "Ex, x is book in some universe
                                    & I need x"

I seem to recall Iain having suggested use of {dahi} previously
as a marker of potential events. I'm not sure {dahi} is the
right cmavo, but I like these ideas more than any of the alternatives
(including any I've proposed hitherto).

---
And