There is something I've been wondering for quite some time.
A sao has the form {sentence 'e' verb}, with the {'e'} referring to the {sentence}.
If we write {vIghro' vIje' 'e' Dalegh}, then this means "you saw that I fed the cat".
But what happens, when before the {'e'} we have two joined sentences ?
Suppose we write {vIghro' vIje' 'ej chab wIvut 'e' Dalegh}.
Where does the {'e'} refer now ? Does it refer to the entire {vIghro' vIje' 'ej chab wIvut}, or does it only refer to the {chab wIvut} ?
Does the {vIghro' vIje' 'ej chab wIvut 'e' Dalegh} mean:
"I fed the cat, and you saw that we baked the pie", or does it mean "You saw that I fed the cat and that we baked the pie" ? Or does it mean both ?
Strictly according to the text of TKD, it could mean either.
Sentence as object is not defined as "sentence 'e' verb"; it is defined as "sentence1 sentence2" (although there is later mention of the "two-verb (or two-sentence) construction." There are several kinds of SAO, including those using 'e' or net, those using neH in the second sentence, those using verbs of speech, and those using rIntaH.
TKD doesn't give much explanation as to what sorts of sentences are allowed as sentence one or sentence two. It only uses basic sentences as components of the examples. I see no particular reason why a compound sentence couldn't be used as sentence one. For that matter, I'm not sure that sentence two couldn't be a compound sentence: chab wIvut 'e' Dachaw' 'ej 'e' Dabej You permit us to and watch us bake a pie. Maybe one could argue that the use of the phrase "two-verb... construction" means compound sentences can't be used in an SAO, but I don't think that was the intention of the phrase. I think it just didn't occur to Okrand.
How about comparatives as sentence one? People do that all the time. SoH HoS law' jIH HoS puS 'e' vItem I deny that you're stronger than me.
How about dependent clauses on either half of an SAO? No reason
not to do that, and that would introduce more verbs, despite the
"two-verb... construction."
But you're right that there's ambiguity. As always, ambiguity is
a normal part of language. If you want to avoid ambiguity, be more
explicit. vIghro' vIje' 'e' Dalegh 'ej chab wIvut 'e' Dalegh
You see me feed the cat and you see us bake a pie.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name