From lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Wed Apr 03 20:47:28 1996
Received: from punt4.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP
	id AA11227 ; Wed, 03 Apr 96 20:47:26 BST
Received: from punt-4.mail.demon.net by mailstore for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk
          id 828560745:29475:2; Wed, 03 Apr 96 20:45:45 BST
Received: from cunyvm.cuny.edu ([128.228.1.2]) by punt-4.mail.demon.net
          id aa28937; 3 Apr 96 20:44 +0100
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3)
   with BSMTP id 1333; Wed, 03 Apr 96 14:44:48 EST
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with
 BSMTP id 1552; Wed, 03 Apr 96 13:27:34 EDT
Date:         Wed, 3 Apr 1996 19:26:11 +0100
Reply-To:     ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
From:         ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: change 46
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Message-ID: <828560701.28937.0@cunyvm.cuny.edu>
Status: R


Jorge:
> pc:
> > (By the way, why does no one ever point out that le q is
> > always on an independent branch?)
> There was a discussion on something related a while back.
> What does {le re nanmu cu cinba le ri speni} mean? Is it
> "each of the two men kisses his (own) spouse", or "each of
> the two men kisses their (common) spouse"? I'm inclined to
> think it is the first, but I don't think there ever was an
> authoritative answer about that. (If it is the first, that
> would be an example where {le} isn't on an independent branch,
> I think.)

That's more a question about {ri} than about {le}. The same
problem arises with {le re nanmu cu cinba lo ri speni}.

I'm not sure what pc means by "le q is on an independent branch".
In what way is "le" on any branch at all, if it's specific/referential?
(Scope does matter with {le}, but that's because {le} = {ro le}.)
===And