Okay, I've tested various backups of the grammar to find out when
this apparent parse change appeared, and it turned out it appeared
along with the implementation of priting of elided terminators.
But after some further testings, I came to the conclusion that there
is actually no parse divergence at all, it is only an apparent
divergence due to printing of elided terminators.
To have a fair comparison, you have to write down all the elided CU:
# { mi cu du i babo mi cu du i babo mi cu du i babo mi cu du }
STD: ([{mi cu} du] [i ba bo {mi cu} du] [i ba bo {mi cu} du] [i ba bo {mi cu} du])
EXP:
([{mi cu} {du VAU}] [i ba bo {mi cu} {du VAU}] [i ba bo {mi cu} {du VAU}] [i ba bo {mi cu} {du VAU}])
As you can see, now the i-clauses are all on the same floor in both
standard and experimental Camxes. :)
mi'e la .ilmen. mu'o