> If you argue that as a matter of style, the

> language needs to bend to your will

I'm afraid you misunderstood me.

I wasn't asking for something to change; I was just expressing that (to me) it seems strange that the grammar forbids something, which at the same time indirectly allows.

The grammar forbids the addition of {-'e'} in the first noun of a {-bogh} clause (in an example as the above), but at the same time the same language allows for us to understand that {-bogh} clause as if the same {-'e'} that it forbids, existed.

Just seems strange, is all.