And in Latin, a nebula is simply fog :)
An astronomical nebula is a nebulozo in Esperanto, it seems.
As a suffix, yes.
But there are also words that have -ul as part of the stem rather than as a suffix, such as regulo (rule) or nebulo (fog).
Sort of like how "-er" in English is "person who does something" (singer, reader, ...), but a finger is not something that fings -- here, "er" is simply part of the stem.
Sometimes, it's ambiguous: regulo could be a rule (regul-o) or a person who rules (reg-ul-o).
That would be Nubulo not Nebulo... but that's actually first thing that came to my mind.
And fog IS just a cloud at ground level.
Shouldn't "perdis" be "maltrovis"?. Chu "perdis" ne devus esti "maltrovis"?
"Maltrovis" is one of those words which you can get away with using, but only in specific contexts and always as an affectation or joke.
- "Ni trovis la vojon sed tuj poste ni maltrovis gxin." We found our way and immediately unfound it.
"Perdi" and "trovi" don't quite exist on a line so "mal" doesn't quite work.
should i assume the difference between cxar and pro as 'because' is that pro always means something like 'because of' where as cxar seems to have a wider use of because.
It's pretty much "ĉar = because, pro = because of".
One stands before a clause with a verb in it; the other stands before a noun.
You can't say (in standard English) "I took an umbrella because the rain", nor "I took an umbrella because of it was raining". Similarly in Esperanto, it's pro la pluvo (because of the rain) but ĉar pluvis (because it was raining).