On 6/13/08, komfo,amonan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Jorge Llambías <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Here is another hard case:
> >
> > lo nixli .e lo nanla cu lumci vo'a
> >
> > Who washes whom?
>
> In that case, I think, everyone washes everyone, including themselves.
> Because I think you ought to expand {vo'a} before expanding {.e}. Hence,
> {ko'a .e ko'e lumci vo'a} =>
> {ko'a .e ko'e lumci ko'a .e ko'e} =>
> {ko'a lumci ko'a .i je ko'e lumci ko'a .i je ko'a lumci ko'e .i je ko'e
> lumci ko'e}
>
> I don't know if there's a *rule* stating you'd expand {.e} before {vo'a},
> but it wouldn't make sense to me at all.
My instinct is the opposite, on the grounds that {.e} appears first
and thus I expect it to have wider scope. I would even take
{ro prenu cu lumci vo'a} as saying that everyone washes themselves,
not that everyone washes everyone. Perhaps a way to make it clear
would be to use {mi'u} in the way English uses "self":
{ko'a .e ko'e lumci vo'a mi'u}, {ro prenu cu lumci vo'a mi'u}.
For the other reading, I would prefer {ko'a .e ko'e lumci ro vo'a},
{ro prenu cu lumci ro vo'a}.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
