You can use it anywhere you could put a JOI, to non-logically connect two things without specifying the exact relationship. I can't think of any good examples right now.

>>685

I'm confused about its official definition saying 'analogous to plain ".i"'. Does that mean that "ju'e" can connect sentences without a "bo"?

>>688

The analogy is meant to be semantic, not syntactic. Connection with "ju'e" has the same semantic import as connection with ".i", i.e. nothing more than juxtaposition.

".i JOI", without BO, is a valid sentence connective BTW, so ".i ju'e" can connect sentences, but it doesn't really add anything to plain ".i".