OK.
This seems like a rather baroque solution!
What's the advantage of adding this layer of indirection?
One thing which seems like a clear disadvantage to me:
e.g. in this example
ca ro nu mi xagji kei mi klama lo zarci .e ba bo lo zdani
-> ca ro nu mi xagji kei ko'a fasnu .i ko'a nu ge ko'e fasnu gi ko'i fasnu
.i ko'i nu ko'o balvi ko'e .i ko'e nu mi klama lo zarci
.i ko'o nu mi klama lo zdani
, there's still no specific indication that the instance of ko'e
witnessing {ko'e fasnu} is the same as the instance of {ko'e} witnessing
{ko'o balvi ko'e}. The only connection is that they're both meant to
happen at around the same time.