putative tense scope effects (was: RE: Concrete examples of Llamban lo'e

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

Xod:
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, And Rosta wrote:
> > > > > > la djan cu darxi lo'e nanmu ze'a le jeftu
> > > > > > John has been hitting men all week
> >
> > But I don't see why {lo nanmu} or {za'u nanmu}
> > wouldn't work here 
> >
> > I guess that behind Jorge's question is a point about scope,
> > and with {lo/za'u} the ordering would need to change to:
> >
> > la djan cu darxi ze'a le jeftu lo/za'u nanmu
> > "All week it has been the case that there is a man (are men) that
> > John hits"
> 
> But those 2 sentences are identical:
> 
> la djan cu darxi lo nanmu ze'a le jeftu
> la djan cu darxi ze'a le jeftu lo nanmu

Are they? You may be right, but it's not obvious that you are.

Certainly there is a difference between

There is a man such that all week it has been the case 
that John hits him.

All week it has been the case that there is a man that John hits.
=At no time during the week has it been false that there is a man
that John hits.

I would have thought that 

la djan cu darxi lo nanmu ze'a le jeftu
la djan cu darxi ze'a le jeftu lo nanmu

would respectively be the ways to express the two meanings. But I may
be wrong -- afaik, this precise point has never been discussed before.

--And.