On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:43:48 AM UTC-4, Ian Johnson wrote:
Though I suppose as xorxes pointed out, we could simply be forced to terminate every {be ... be'o} construction. But {be} was conceived of, as best I can tell, as being much like a genitive case (in English, like the word "of"). Thus usually {be} appears with a single sumti in the chain, which means saving the {be'o} saves more words, especially in speech, than saving {bei} does.
That makes sense. Thanks.
Considering the reasoning, it seems to me that the most concise solution would be to have two different cmavo for {be}. One that only takes a single sumti, and another that can take any number but has to be terminated.