Some Scope Creep

Hoemaı's response to No Scope Creep was a suggestion to consider serial verbs separately from other cases.

Under Some Scope Creep, bu kuq jí sá means ¬(∃x kuq jí x) and ao kuq jí sá means AO(∃x kuq jí x), just like in NSC — but shoe kuq still acts like an atomic verb as in vanilla Toaq, and so shoe kuq jí súq sá means ∃x shoe kuq jí súq x.

"shoe kuq" as a constituent. It's clear why things in TP and above make scopes but shoe does not.

In fact, Laqme thinks we should analyze serial verbs as constituents, rather than using movement. In that case, it's natural that shoe would not introduce scope; rather, shoe kuq can somehow be considered a V, reflecting that serials and atomic verbs really are syntactically the same. (This would change the behavior of ru, but perhaps for the better!)

(I guess there is some "internal structure" to a serial V. I imagine shoe can "apply to" kuq to get the meaning of shoe kuq, if you do a silly amount of type-shifting. Or maybe there is a covert operator in any serial that knows how to "do" the serialization — shoe kuq is really shoe x_shoe kuq where x_shoe is some unpronounced operator that implements merge-into for shoe's frame.)

So basically: scope acts as described in No Scope Creep, serial verbs are just verbs, and there is no movement in VPs. This is a big step away from Chomsky-style generative grammar, towards something more like Montague grammar / effectful parsing / continuations and type-checking-based semantics.