Re: mo'e

[jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU]

> >You are right, it is grammatical. I felt that it had to be ungrammatical
> >because it is not a sumti. I have no idea what kind of operand is
> >{la'e <operand>}. It still feels ungrammatical to me, even if it is
> >accepted by the parser.
>
> You mean that you have never used a 'pointer variable' in programming?

Not knowingly. But operands are not like programming variables, are they?

> I always though "la'e" was much clearer in a Mex context than in a semantic
> one.

I understand {la'e} in front of a sumti that refers to a name/citation.
It is essentially the inverse of quoting, e.g. {la'e zo mi} is
more or less equivalent to "the speaker".

> It means take the value of the operand, and use that value to select
> or point to a second-order operand value.

I guess I'll have to wait and see it in use.

Anyway, what does {mo'e da}, or {la'e mo'e da} mean, then?
Do we use the rule for {mo'e li ci} or the one for {mo'e lo plise}?
Is it some quantifier or the dimensioned number "at least one something"?

Jorge