pc:
xorxes:
<<pc:
>you might even be allowed {le do zo zo'u}).
It doesn't parse. You can make it {le do me zo zo'u},
or, weird but possible, {le do pa zo zo'u}.>>
Thanks. I can't get this rule straight. I suppose that the problem here
is that {le} absorbs {do} into a new LE. Does it absorb {pu} and {vi} as
well?
I don't think that's how it works. You can insert {do}
into {le me zo zo'u} or into {le pa zo zo'u}, but you
cannot insert it into {le zo zo'u} because this is not
a well formed sumti. At least that's how I picture it.
You can't say that {le} absorbs {do} into a new LE,
because in that case the new LE would absorb {zo zo'u}
into yet another LE.
co'o mi'e xorxes
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com