History: ''ca'ai'', ''ka'ei'' and ''nu'oi', and ''nau'a''

(A), (B) and (C) are alternatives.

1. "In some possible worlds (in which q is the case), possibly including This World, p"
A. su'o mu'ei
B. ka'ei
C. ka'e

2. "In some possible worlds (in which q is the case), including This World, p"
A. nau'a
B. ca'ai
C. ca'a

3. "In some possible worlds (in which q is the case), not including This World, p"
A. na ku nau'a su'o mu'ei??? — or nau'a nai???
B. nu'oi
C. nu'o

On the face of things, option C would be preferred, rendering ca'ai, ka'ei, nu'oi and nau'a redundant. And some people's understanding of ca'a et al is consistent with this. The snag is that ca'a et al are understood by others (including ma'oste gloss and Woldy) to involve an element of capability.

• I should add that I believe that originally ca'a/ka'e/nu'o were intended to have the meanings given above under (C), and the notion of capability crept in through a failure of understanding which then got cemented in official documents.
• But the argument pro pattern C is being revived: see CAhA as sumtcita.
• On the CAhA as sumtcita page, I argue for 1 = A mu'ei, 2 = C ca'a, 3 = C nu'o. Therefore I am not in favour of any of ca'ai, ka'ei, nu'oi and nau'a.

--And