Is a subsequent qualification changing the nature of an unqualified debt acknowledgment accepted if stated after a pause?

Primary text

If one initially states, 'I owe one thousand,' then pauses, and subsequently states, 'It is from a sale price,' this qualification is not accepted. This is because the subsequent explanation serves to qualify the initial obligation by introducing a term that suspends the immediate requirement for fulfillment, which is invalid when introduced separately after the initial unqualified acknowledgment, similar to subsequently claiming the debt is deferred.