Re: feedback: VSO syntax

(TMA +) V (+ADV.) SUBJ. (+ADJ.)(+Rel. C.) Prep./Loc. OBJ. (+ADJ.)(+Rel.C.)

As far as I see, there's only one area that *could* cause problems (doesn't
have to: Just could).

Consider just this bit:

SUBJ. (+ADJ.)(+Rel. C.) Prep./Loc.

Using English words, you might have the following:

(the) men two tall (that) saw I [gap] *on (the) grass*

What does that prepositional phrase refer to?   Is it the men that're on the
grass?   Did the seeing happen on the
grass?   Did the action of the main verb happen on the grass?   In fact,
let's make this a full sentence just to make
the point clearer:

Ate (the) men two tall (that) saw I [gap] *on the grass* (the) apples.

The above sentence could potentially have any of the following three
meanings:

(1) On the grass, the two tall men that I saw ate the apples.
(2) The two tall men that I saw while I was on the grass ate the apples.
(3) The two tall men that I saw while they were on the grass ate the apples.

Unless you have a default rule (i.e., a rule that states given a situation
where possible ambiguity could arise,
only one reading is possible), you'll have to come up with more than one
place for locative phrases to occur.
*Unless* you prefer to keep the ambiguity, which I think is perfectly
acceptable.   You should probably come up
with some sort of strategy (like a focus strategy) to disambiguate, if a
speaker of this language really wanted to
disambiguate.

-David
*******************************************************************
"sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."

-Jim Morrison

http://dedalvs.free.fr/