Re: change 46

[ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>]

Jorge:
> pc:
> > (By the way, why does no one ever point out that le q is
> > always on an independent branch?)
> There was a discussion on something related a while back.
> What does {le re nanmu cu cinba le ri speni} mean? Is it
> "each of the two men kisses his (own) spouse", or "each of
> the two men kisses their (common) spouse"? I'm inclined to
> think it is the first, but I don't think there ever was an
> authoritative answer about that. (If it is the first, that
> would be an example where {le} isn't on an independent branch,
> I think.)

That's more a question about {ri} than about {le}. The same
problem arises with {le re nanmu cu cinba lo ri speni}.

I'm not sure what pc means by "le q is on an independent branch".
In what way is "le" on any branch at all, if it's specific/referential?
(Scope does matter with {le}, but that's because {le} = {ro le}.)
===And