From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Wed Nov 14 06:01:53 2001
Return-Path: <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>
X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 14 Nov 2001 14:01:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 14688 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 14:01:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167)
  by m4.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 Nov 2001 14:01:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3)
  by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 14:01:52 -0000
Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer);
  Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:38:03 +0000
Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk
  with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:14:03 +0000
Message-Id: <sbf27c2b.057@gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:13:52 +0000
To: jjllambias <jjllambias@hotmail.com>, lojban <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Why is there so much irregularity in cmavo/gismu?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
From: And Rosta <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin

>>> Jorge Llambias <jjllambias@hotmail.com> 11/14/01 12:28am >>>
#>And why does CAhA have different grammar? It is grammatically correct to
#>say {mi pu ca'a broda} but not {mi ca'a pu broda}.
#
#Both are grammatically correct, but the second one parses
#as {mi ca'aku pu broda}.

... which makes them synonymous, with pu having scope over ca'a in
both cases. So to get ca'a with scope over pu, we have to say
{mi ca'a (ku) pu *ku* broda}?

--And.