[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
| In a message dated 11/3/2002 10:18:47 AM Central Standard Time, a.rosta@hidden.email writes: << . But if >> Well, there is always explicit depth markers, if we start thinking treely. we have {bi'e} for MEX operators, but it -- or something like it -- could be (and maybe are) extended to binary sentential connectives, negation and quantifiers (and tenses, for that matter -- where they might be handy). I suppose we would need subscripts to allow for a variety of levels, though LR order could be the default (but you still might want subscripts to stick the new guy in in the middle of some string). These marks tend to be a bit harder to read than linear ones, but easier on the speaker than going back and reformulating. Wrap-around {zo'au} is probably a better compromise. |