RE: [jboske] anaphora & glorking (was: RE: sane kau? (was: RE: Re: RE: Re:lo'edu'u

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

xorxes:
> la djorden cusku di'e
> 
> >So, I'm not sure what you want for "le nanmu ri prami" 
> 
> I think he wants to know which of these it means:
> 
> A- ro da poi cmima le'i nanmu cu prami da
> 
> B- ro da poi cmima le'i nanmu cu prami ro de poi cmima le'i nanmu
> 
> In other words: "each of the men loves himself" or "each of
> the men loves each of the other men as well as himself" 

Thanks for chiming in to explain what I was failing to
communicate!

> I don't think there is an official answer, but I think it should
> mean A. The problem with this though, is when {ri} jumps scope
> boundaries, which is not the case here 

A further problem of sorts is that {da} is of course not a licit 
antecedent for an anaphor on the other side of a scope boundary, 
but {le'i} is a licit antecedent, and it would be good to have 
an anaphor that would take the le'i as its antecedent, even if 
{ri} is not the anaphor for this job. The sort of anaphor that 
would be helpful would be something like a {go'i} that picks up 
its antecedents by backcounting through sumti.

--And.