Interaction of {na} and {su'o}

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

Xorxes came up with this on the beginners' list. I'm not sure what it 
means, so it's beyond the scope of beginners. So here it is:
---
The {naku} versions are equivalent and quite uncontroversial, yes.

The problem is the meaning of {na} in front of the selbri. The official rule
is that it's equivalent to {naku} in front of everything, as you say, 
but this
rule is problematic. Let's consider this example:

         su'o danlu cu xanto gi'e na xarju

What does that say?

There are three operators with scope to consider: {su'o}, {gi'e} and {na}.
It can't be the case that {su'o} has scope over {gi'e}, and {gi'e} has scope
over {na}, and {na} has scope over {su'o}. One of them has to give. Which
one? The most sensible for me is su'o > gi'e > na, i.e. that there are
some animals that are elephants and not pigs. I don't know what
interpretation the offficial rule supporters give to that sentence.