RE: [jboske] zo'au, vau

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

pc:
> jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:
> 
> <<
> 
> . I was thinking
> whether the "trailing prenex" (should that be called a
> "postnex"?) should really reverse the order of quantifiers
> or just have general precedence over the body but still in
> the usual order. That way we can think of it as an
> afterthought continuation of the prenex.
> 
> >>
> With strict RPN, which this sorta emulates, the order would be 
> smallest scope to largest left to right -- the reverse of the prenex 
> situation. But I think that IS to confusing and the story 
> "afterthought continuation of prenex" (even if there is no visible 
> prenex at all) is probably going to be the most usable. I do think 
> the ida of having such a device is desirable -- and feasible withon 
> even Lojban.

How about 

zo'au ro da su'o de

has left to right scope, as per Jorge's suggestion, but

zo'au ro da zo'au su'o de

has outer-inner scope, as I would prefer?

--And.