On 28 Sep 2014 02:34, "Martin Bays" <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> the compositionality
> of restrictive clauses (which admittedly is already broken in some other
> cases, e.g. {da poi broda}).
I agree {da poi} looks broken. What are the remedies? (1) To allow noncompositional idioms? (2) To define /poi/ as an allomorph of /noi/ in this syntactic environment? (3) To accept that, given the internal logic of the language, {da poi} as habitually used is simply wrong? (4) To seek and find a consistent definition for {poi} and {noi} such that {da poi} usage becomes correct?
--And.
--