Some preamble...

Don Harlow en "The 16 Rules of Esperanto Grammar":The ability to distinguish between subject and object via the -N ending not only allows greater freedom of word order, but also allows us, in some cases, to remove potential ambiguities when a coordinated noun's relationship to the original noun is either tacit or indeterminable. A good example of what this means is the sentence

He treated me like a prince

In Esperanto, this sort of sentence is easily handled. In the first case

Li traktis min kiel princon

where the -N on the end shows that the noun coordinates with "min". On the other hand, if we should (for some reason) wish to express the second case, we can use

Li traktis min kiel princo

where the lack of a final -N shows that the noun coordinates with "li".

While the particles anstataŭ (instead of) and krom (besides, in addition to) are generally classified (by analogy with their equivalents in Western languages) as prepositions, their behavior is more like that of coördinating conjunctions such as kiel. So many Esperanto speakers will add the -n ending to the objects of these "prepositions" when they coordinate with another word that has an -n ending.

EXAMPLES
Mi amis ŝin anstataŭ li
= It was I, not he, who loved her.
Mi amis ŝin anstataŭ lin
= I loved her, not him.

A question for those of you familiar with PMEG. I've been trying to find where the disambiguating methods shown above are dealt with but so far with no success. Does anyone know in which page, if any, this is covered in PMEG?

@Miland, if I recall correctly you have a copy of the Plena Analiza Gramatiko don't you? Do u know whether or not it's covered in that grammarbook too?

I think in the pages describing kiel.

You're the man! Thanks.

PAG deals with this topic, for example in the remark to para 262(Subprepoziciaj komparoj).I(Indikaj).A(Samgradigaj).1(Komparoj de agoj):

"la esprimitaj frazelementoj devas havi la saman kazon, kiun tiuj ĉefprop-aj frazelementoj, al kiun ili rilatas: li traktis lin kiel krimulo (komparilo subjekta, do nominativa); li traktis lin kiel krimulon (komparilo objekta, do akuzativa)."

I translate: "The phrase has the same case as the part of the main clause to which it relates: he treated me as a criminal (nom.) (comparison of subjects, hence nominative); he treated me as a criminal(acc.) (comparison of objects, hence accusative).

However, it appears that you are content with the treatment in PMEG!

Thanks for that Miland. You also are the man

The Lingvaj Respondoj de Zamenhof itself had already dealt with this topic as well.

Zamenhof:PRI LA KAZO POST “KIEL”
La frazon “ĝi (la diskutado) trafas Ibsenon kiel teoriisto” mi trovas nebona; mi konsilas diri “kiel teoriiston”. La esprimo “kiel teoriisto” signifas, ke ĝi (la diskutado) estas teoriisto kaj, estante teoriisto, ĝi trafas Ibsenon...

I can't translate it well (due to lack of time and skill), but I hope you'll understand.

patrik:The Lingvaj Respondoj de Zamenhof itself had already dealt with this topic as well.

Zamenhof:PRI LA KAZO POST “KIEL”
La frazon “ĝi (la diskutado) trafas Ibsenon kiel teoriisto” mi trovas nebona; mi konsilas diri “kiel teoriiston”. La esprimo “kiel teoriisto” signifas, ke ĝi (la diskutado) estas teoriisto kaj, estante teoriisto, ĝi trafas Ibsenon...

I can't translate it well (due to lack of time and skill), but I hope you'll understand.

Mia rapida traduko:
CONCERNING THE CASE AFTER "KIEL"
I find the sentence "ĝi (the discussed thing) trafas Ibsenon kiel teoriisto (it strikes Ibseno as a terrorist)" unsatisfactory; I advise people to say "kiel teoriiston". The expression "kiel teoriisto" means, the discussion is made by a terrorist and therefore "it, being a terrorist (?), strikes Ibsenon...

I hope this was a good enough translation - the main problem was 'trafi' because I had trouble understanding what the example sentence was meant to mean - does this mean 'strike' as in 'This strikes me as being child-made' (when looking at a sand castle) or is it insinuating that Ibseno (Poor dude) appears to be a terrorist?

ceigered:
Mia rapida traduko:
CONCERNING THE CASE AFTER "KIEL"
I find the sentence "ĝi (the discussed thing) trafas Ibsenon kiel teoriisto (it strikes Ibseno as a terrorist)" unsatisfactory; I advise people to say "kiel teoriiston". The expression "kiel teoriisto" means, the discussion is made by a terrorist and therefore "it, being a terrorist (?), strikes Ibsenon...

I hope this was a good enough translation - the main problem was 'trafi' because I had trouble understanding what the example sentence was meant to mean - does this mean 'strike' as in 'This strikes me as being child-made' (when looking at a sand castle) or is it insinuating that Ibseno (Poor dude) appears to be a terrorist?

No, terrorist is "teroristo". "Teoriisto" is a theorist.

About "strike", I think you're right.

Zamenhof:PRI LA KAZO POST “KIEL”...

I would interpret trafas in this context to mean "marks" or "indicates" rather than "strikes", and so translate this as follows:

"CONCERNING THE CASE AFTER "KIEL"
The sentence "it (the discussion) marks Ibsen as a theorist (nom.)" I find unsatisfactory; I suggest saying "as a theorist (acc.)". The expression "as a theorist (nom.)" means that it (the discussion) is a theorist and, being a theorist, it marks Ibsen.."

patrik:No, terrorist is "teroristo". "Teoriitso" is a theorist.

About "strike", I think you're right.

Whoooops... Serves me right for relying on pronunciation instead of the highly obvious written resemblence

And thanks for your feedback on 'strike', really confused me