krtisfranks wrote:
> gleki wrote:
> >
>
> Okay, maybe this will explain it:
>
> "piso'a" does NOT always mean 100%. It means maybe 90%, or 99%, or
> 99.99999%, depending on context, but it definitely can mean something
other
> than exactly and truly 100%. It can be strictly less than 100% (and is
> always strictly greater than 0%, probably even strictly greater than 50%,

> if the whole has enough subparts). I would assume that "so'a" does not
> contain "ro" and likewise for 'piso'a" and "piro". It is also
> context-dependent on its value.
>
> "pisoi'ai" always, always, ALWAYS means 100%. There is no context
> dependency or anything like that. (However, it never refers to the whole
of
> the thing, which is piro. Therefore, it is bounded below by any
possible
> value for piso'a such that the result is not 100% and is bounded above
by
> piro).
>
> Right now, I am okay with piso'a possibly sometimes referring to the
same
> thing as pisoi'ai, depending on context. But there are times when it
> does/may not. Basically, pisoi'ai is always piso'a in this loose
definition
> which I currently accept, but the inverse is not true. If you want piso'a

> strictly less than pisoi'ai, then say as much ("piso'a jenai pisoi'ai" or

> similar). Notice that to say "pisu'esoi'ai" or "su'episoi'ai" (I am not
> sure that there is a meaningful difference between these two options
right
> now) should mean any fraction of the whole such that it is not the whole
> (piro), including very small fractions or even 0%. Moreover,
"me'ipisoi'ai"
> or "pime'isoi'ai" (again, I am not sure that these differ from one
another)
> is more or less equivalent to "su'episo'a" or "pisu'eso'a" (likewise),
> except for the case when "so'a" can or does refer to 100% (so maybe that
is
> a reason for piso'a being always strictly bounded above by pisoi'ai, not
> that I think about it - so, maybe I will have to say that piso'a is never

> pisoi'ai and vice-versa, afterall, contrary to what I said before).
Recall
> that "100%" in this case is not equivalent to "the whole of".
>
> So, if piso'a of that makes sense to you, then you can analogously
> understand soi'ai alone by comparing it to so'a, ro, and maybe da'a.

One last take:

"piso'a" means "by far most of" or "very, very much/many of".

"pisoi'ai" is far more technical in its definition.