la djorden cusku di'e
> {paroi ro le re djedi} is a single term as much as
> {paroi le pavdei e le reldei} is a single term. Whatever rule
> applies to one (scopewise) should apply to the other.
Of course...
> The rule I think is the Right Thing is that {e}/{ro} have
> scope over {pa} in that example.
That is of course the whole discussion. My viewpoint is that the
paroi scopes over the pavdei, which scopes over the reldei, etc.
You say of course, but you don't apply it. You are not taking
into account that {e} has a scope of its own as well. When you
split {paroi ko'a e ko'e} into {paroi ko'a ije paroi ko'e}, you're
saying that {e} has scope over {paroi}. If {paroi} had scope over
{e} you could not make the expansion. Expanding {e} is equivalent
to exporting {ro} to the prenex.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com