lau'i = lu'i su'o? (was: RE: anaphora & glorking

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

xorxes:
> la and cusku di'e
> 
> >How do we say "it is not the case that three men are inside
> >the house and two of them are dead"?
> >
> >I'd say:
> >
> >"na ku ge nenri le zdani rolau'i ci nanmu gi re ri morsi"
> 
> Yes, that would work 
> 
> I think {ro lau'i ci nanmu} could be {ro lu'a lu'i ci lo nanmu}
> but then {ri} would not work because it would send to {ci lo nanmu}
> instead of to the whole thing. This might be an argument in favour
> of {lau'i} 

I find the lu'a unnecessary, but I would have thought the proposed
rule would make "re ri" mean "re (lu'a) the-aforementioned
lu'i ci nanmu". 

I don't currently see why "lau'i broda" isn't equivalent to "lu'i 
su'o broda", and unless you can see a difference, I think I will
move "lau'i" to obsolete proposals and use "lu'i su'o" instead.

--And.