Re: Just to be sure

la and cusku di'e
> xorxes:
> > lo broda be ro brode
> > is 
> > su'o da poi ro de zo'u da broda de
> > right?
> > In other words, a quantifier in a be-complement does not
> > export to the prenex of the main bridi, but only to the 
> > prenex of the subordinated clause. I think this is obvious,
> > but I just want to make sure everyone agrees.
> 
> ye-es, but the subordinate clause is a syntactic artefact.
> {lo broda cu brode} can rewrite as {da ge broda gi broda}.
> Hence {lo broda be ro brode cu brodo} should rewrite as
> {da ge broda be ro brode gi brodo} (with ro within scope of
> ge).

Right, I asked the wrong question.

I think what I was after was {tu'o broda be su'o brode}.
In that case, the quantifier does remain behind an opaque
barrier, doesn't it?

I'm trying to figure out whether {tu'o datni be lo broda}
is a good rendering of {tu'a lo broda}, which is usually
understood to be {tu'o du'u lo broda cu co'e}.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com