| The article notes that in some languages it is possible to form sentences by chaining appendixes to them. An example in Finnish: - jousta (normal form of the verb run) - juoksen (I run) - juoksentelen (I run around) - juoksentelisinkohan (I wonder should I run around) - juostaankohammekohaan (I wonder do we run) The two later forms are very rarely used, and I have no idea whether the last form is even correct. I have some friends who insist on talking like this. Usually, people express the same things with more words, such as juoksentelisinkohan is equivalent to about: - Mietin ., että. pitäisikö. minun. juosta. ympäriinsä. - I wonder., that. should. my (in this context, me). run. around. The . are to separate the words. Yet, it would be perfectly fine to just append a question mark to juoksentelisinkohan or juostaankohammekohaan and it would be a one-word sentence. An interesting remark is that in practice the question mark is redundant in both cases, as the -ko- part in the words reduces the only interpretation of the word to be a question. I have absolutely no idea how would one formalize all this. |
The frequentative forms would be "juoksentelemmekohan" and "juoksennellaankohan" respectively.