> But that grammar has never been 

> elaborated on and we have no other 

> examples, so it's probably best not to 

> mess too much with it.

Yes, indeed. But it's truly a pity though.. With the law'/puS construction being rigid the way it is, I wish we were given the liberty to play with it, even if that meant having the freedom to place a simple type-9 clause before the {puS} part.

~ Dana'an

I love you maltz