'Admissibility' can best be thought of as a concept consisting of two quite different aspects: disclosure to the trier of fact and express or implied permission to use as 'evidence.' If we think of admissibility as a question of disclosure or nondisclosur

'Admissibility' can best be thought of as a concept consisting of two quite different aspects: disclosure to the trier of fact and express or implied permission to use as 'evidence.' If we think of admissibility as a question of disclosure or nondisclosure, it us usually easy to say whether or not an item of evidence has been admitted. When we consider the question of permissible use, the concept seems much more complicated. In the first place, evidence may be 'admissible' for one purpose but not for another. . . . In the second place, questions of the permissible use of evidence do not arise only at the time of disclosure to the trier of fact. The court may have to consider admissibility in deciding whether to give the jury a limiting instruction, whether or not an opponent's rebuttal evidence is relevant, and whether or not counsel can argue to the jury that the evidence proves a particular point. [Citing 22 Charles Alan Wright & Kenneth W. Graham, Jr., Federal Practice and Procedure §5193, at 194 (1978).]