RE: [jboske] me+moi (was: RE: la, lai, me

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

xorxes:
> la and cusku di'e
> 
> >There's a potential ambiguity, I think, between "100th" and
> >"uniquely pertaining to 100". For example, if we are orded
> >by our ages, then I am pe li 35, but I am not 35th. So
> >{me li ci mu me'u moi} is potentially ambiguous.
> 
> But {moi} has an x2 and x3 to disambiguate. You can
> specify in which set and by what rules you're ordering.

So {ci mu moi zo'e zo'e} does not necessarily mean "35th in
sequence zo'e ordered by criterion zo'e"?

--And.