Another grammatical question that is not directly handled by TKD. So the basic word for "where" is {nuqDaq}, which is explicitly the question pronoun {nuq} with the locative suffix. So would it also be acceptable to combine {nuq} with {-vo'} where appropriate? So if I wanted to translate "Where did he come from?", could I say, for example, {nuqvo' ghoSpu'}. I could see where that would be useful to distinguish it from {nuqDaq ghoSpu'}, which I would translate as "Where did he go?" or "Where was he headed?" On the other hand, I am aware of several phrases in natural languages that, while being constructed through grammatical phrases, become a set phrase and are used if it doesn't make the most grammatical sense within contact. So I could also imagine that even though {nugDaq} was a constructed phrase, it has taken on a set meaning. If that's the case, how would you translate "Where did he come from?" Would it just be {nuqDaq ghospu'}, with context providing the appropriate translation? Or would you use a different, less ambiguous verb like {mej}?
As always, thanks in advance for any guidance and clarification. It is always much appreciated!
Maybe say something longer like:
{naDev DapawmeH, nuqDaq bImej?} – "In order to arrive here, where did you leave?"
Although {nuqDaq bImej} would probably work in the right context.
You could also rework your question, maybe using {yIngu'} and saying something like:
Daqvo' DaghoSbogh yIngu'!
Identify the place that you approached from!
Correct, I think it's easier to consider it a single {nuqDaq} than {nuq} + {-Daq}. (Edited because I was wrong about it apparently using the {-Daq} suffix, although I think this was done to explain that {nuqDaq} goes into the same grammatical spot as other words with {-Daq} on them, and not as a license to add suffixes to {nuq})
The Klingon Dictionary, Section 6.4 "Questions", says: The word for "where?", {nuqDaq}, is actually {nuq} "what?" followed by the suffix {-Daq} "locative" (see section 2.5.5). I'd expect {nuqvo'} to be understood, but I don't know that it's a normal way to ask "whence" in Klingon.
Do you think that line allows you to add different noun suffixes on {nuq}? or do you think that {nuqDaq} is a single concept that isn't a formula for other {nuq} based question words (nuqvo', nuqHey, nuqna')?
I'm not sure whether any suffix would be appropriate for a question word, but the more I have mulled this over, the more it seems like it would at least be useful to be able to tack type 5 suffixes on. For example, questions like: {'IvvaD taj Danob} To whom are you giving the knife? {nuqmo' jorpu' Duj} What was the cause of the ship exploding? At least in some of these cases, I assume you could rewrite the sentences appropriately. For example, my last sentence could easily be {Duj jormoHpu' nuq}. But again, without any canon support, it seems like pure conjecture. Given how other questions like this have been decided, I'm guessing qurgh is probably right in treating the {nuqDaq} as a single, set phrase. Sort of like how {tu'lu'} is set and doesn't become {lutu'lu'} with a plural object.
Thanks for the help! So I take it then, the "nuqDaq" should be considered an immutable word and not just a construct?