I understand that, as a consequence, structures like the third line of (b) are unacceptable, because the subject of cey-tu and celvōm are human and not identical. Would the use of the infinitive ceyy-a ± ‑um as in (c) improve the sentence or even make it grammatical?
a. avarkaḷ mutalil kōyilukku
pōvarkaḷ
they first temple.dat go.fut.3pl.mf
kōyilukku.p pōy-i pūcai
ceyvārkaḷ
temple.dat go-cvb worship do.fut.3pl.mf
pūcai cey-tu kaṭaikku.p pōvārkaḷ …
worship do-cvb shop.dat go.fut.3pl.mf
‘They will first go the temple; having gone to the temple, they will worship; having worshipped, they will go to the shop …’
b. avarkaḷ mutalil kōyilukku pōvarkaḷ
they first temple.dat go.fut.3pl.mf
kōyilukku.p pōy-i pūcai ceyvārkaḷ
temple.dat go-cvb worship do.fut.3pl.mf
(avarkaḷ) pūcai cey-tu nāṅkaḷ avarkaḷai kaṭaikku
they worship do-cvb we them
shop.dat
ar̤aittu.c celvōm …
pick.up.cvb go.fut.1pl
‘They will first go the temple; having gone to the temple, they will worship; they having worshipped, we will take them to the shop …’
c. avarkaḷ mutalil kōyilukku pōvarkaḷ
he.pl.mf.nom first temple.dat go.fut.3pl.mf
kōyilukku.p pōy-i pūcai ceyvārkaḷ
temple.dat go-cvb worship do.fut.3pl.mf
(avarkaḷ) pūcai ceyy-a(-v.um) nāṅkaḷ avarkaḷai kaṭaikku
they worship do-inf we them
shop.dat
ar̤aittu.c celvōm …
pick.up.cvb go.fut.1pl
‘They will first go the temple; having gone to the temple, they will worship; they having worshipped, we will take them to the shop …’