[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
A further problem of sorts is that {da} is of course not a licit
antecedent for an anaphor on the other side of a scope boundary,
but {le'i} is a licit antecedent, and it would be good to have
an anaphor that would take the le'i as its antecedent, even if
{ri} is not the anaphor for this job. The sort of anaphor that
would be helpful would be something like a {go'i} that picks up
its antecedents by backcounting through sumti.
I think the solution should be something like this, the same one for all/most pro-sumti: 1- If the pro-sumti is overtly quantified, then the new quantification is restricted to the same set over which the antecedent's quantification was restricted. 2- If the pro-sumti is not overtly quantified and is still within the scope of its antecedent's quantifier, then it is a variable bound by that quantifier. 3- If the pro-sumti is not overtly quantified and it is outside the scope of its antecedent's quantifier, then it is taken to have a default quantifier (ro?, su'o?) that starts a new quantification over the same set over which the antecedent was quantified. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail