How do non-Indo-European languages pose WH question?

[Isfendil]

The question is outlined in the title, but some elaborations would be what are some equivalents for words such as "who”, "what", "when", "where", and "why" in other languages? I know that one way to put how is "In what way" (che jūrī in the Farsi) and that why is said the same way in many Indo-European languages (For what) but in these cases, what is "what"? A pronoun? Specifier? I only have a basic knowledge of syntax garnered from the First Year Intro to Linguistics course I took (which was for linguists apparently although my colleagues who actually want to pursue the field tell me that it's a bit reductive) and the IPA, but I've only recently discovered grammars of non-agglutinative or non Indo-European languages and I know that there must be another way of going about them.

Any assistance is appreciated!

[HoskhMatriarch]

Most languages have most of the same words (who, what, where, why, how, when, etc.) IIRC, but they don't all start with the same letter and rather have unrelated roots, and usually there's no seperate word for which, only what.

[Creyeditor]

Okay, so there's several aspects of wh-questions: first morphosyntax. Languages are usually either wh-in situ or wh-movement languages. English is a wh-movement language, i.e. wh-words are always fronted as in What do you want?. Other languages might not or only optionally front them, so a sentence like You want what? is grammatical. For some languages a fronted wh-word has to be marked as in Indonesian:

Apa yang kamu mau?
what FOC 2SG want
What do you want?

The second part is derivational morphology. Which questions words are simple, which are derived? Sometimes question words are homophonous with or derived from indefinite pronouns. Let me give you an example: In Indonesian there are only three morphologically simple wh-words, the rest is derived:

Apa?
what

mana
where

kapan
when

Si-apa
PRS.DEF-what
who

bagai-mana
as-where
how

ken-apa
?-what
why

yang mana
REL where
which one

[...] that why is said the same way in many Indo-European languages (For what) but in these cases, what is "what"? A pronoun? Specifier? [...]

There's also the syntactic side of question words. Content question words are seen as interrogative pronouns in many syntactic theories. The structure of a phrase like "for what" would be something like this: [PP [P for ] [NP what ] ], where "what" is a pronoun and forms a prepositional phrase with "for". This entails some interesting facts about movement and what exactly should be moved, but I don't know if you are interested in that.

[Thrice Xandvii]

Aren't there also languages that use an interrogative marker but otherwise form the sentence normally?

Something like:

2.SG want 3.SG INT
What do you want?

or

2.SG want something INT
What do you want?

[Creyeditor]

Aren't there also languages that use an interrogative marker but otherwise form the sentence normally?

Something like:

2.SG want 3.SG INT
What do you want?

or

2.SG want something INT
What do you want?

Well some people might argue, that interrogative and indefinite/3.SG pronouns are homophonous in these language or interrogatives are derived from indefinite pronouns. It depends on your analysis...

I mean there are languages where interrogative pronouns can be used as indefinite pronouns, e.g. colloquial German:

Willste was?
willst=te was?
want.2SG=2SG what/something
Do you want some(thing)?

Was willste?
was willst=te?
what/something want.2SG=2SG
What do you want?

There are languages with interrogatives and indefinites being derived from the same form, such as in Ngiyambaa (Pama–Nyungan, Australia):

minja-waa
what/something-INTERRO
what

minja-ga
what/something-INDEF
something

I don't see any reason, why this shouldn't happen analytically.

[masako]

Aren't there also languages that use an interrogative marker but otherwise form the sentence normally?

Yes.

A particular type of interrogative word is the interrogative particle, which serves to convert a statement into a yes–no question, without having any other meaning. Examples include est-ce que in French, ли li in Russian, czy in Polish, কি ki in Bengali, 吗 ma in Chinese, mı/mi in Turkish and か ka in Japanese. (The English word whether has a similar function but only in indirect questions; and Multicultural London English may use "innit", even in the absence of the pronoun "it".) Such particles contrast with other interrogative words, which form what are called wh-questions rather than yes–no questions.

[Creyeditor]

Aren't there also languages that use an interrogative marker but otherwise form the sentence normally?

Yes.

A particular type of interrogative word is the interrogative particle, which serves to convert a statement into a yes–no question, without having any other meaning. Examples include est-ce que in French, ли li in Russian, czy in Polish, কি ki in Bengali, 吗 ma in Chinese, mı/mi in Turkish and か ka in Japanese. (The English word whether has a similar function but only in indirect questions; and Multicultural London English may use "innit", even in the absence of the pronoun "it".) Such particles contrast with other interrogative words, which form what are called wh-questions rather than yes–no questions.

IIUC, the wikipedia artcile is talking about interrogative particles in yes-no questions, but 37 was asking about interrogative markers in wh-questions.

[GrandPiano]

I don't know much about Wh-questions in other non-IE languages, but if it helps, here's how it works in Mandarin:

Mandarin has 5 basic wh-words (that I can think of):

什么
shénme [ʂən˧˥mɤ̆˨]
what

哪
nǎ [na˨˩˦]
which

谁
shuí [ʂweɪ̯˧˥] or shéi [ʂeɪ̯˧˥] (shuí is more formal and shéi is more colloquial)
who

怎么
zěnme [t͡sən˨˩mɤ̆˦]
how (in the sense of "in what way" or "by what means")

多
duō [twɔ˥]
how (in the sense of "to what extent" or "to what degree"; this word usually means "many", but can also be used in this sense)

The 么 in 什么 and 怎么 is a morpheme that doesn't have any meaning on its own, but occurs as a suffix in a small number of words, mostly interrogative.

Other wh-words are expressed with multiple words or derived from other words:

为什么
wèi shénme [weɪ̯˥˩ ʂən˧˥mɤ̆˨]
for what
why

什么时候
shénme shíhou [ʂən˧˥mɤ̆˨ ʂʐ̩˧˥xə̆ʊ̯˨]
what time
when

哪儿 or 哪里
nǎr [nɑɻ˨˩˦] or nǎlǐ [na˧˥li˨˩˦]
which-? or which-in
where

(Is it unusual that Mandarin has separate non-derived words for what and which but not for why, when, and where?)

I'm not sure how to gloss the 儿 in the last example, but it's a suffix that adds a [-ɻ] (<-r> in pinyin romanization) to the end of a syllable, sometimes affecting the vowel and/or coda consonant, in a process called erhua. The 儿 suffix doesn't have any particular meaning, although it can have a diminutive effect in some dialects, and it can be used to distinguish nouns from verbs (e.g. 画 huà "to draw, to paint" vs. 画儿 huàr "drawing, painting" in some dialects). Some dialects use it to varying extents (the Beijing dialect uses it a lot), while others don't use it at all. In Standard Chinese, only certain words are used with erhua, and 哪儿 is one of them. In this case, the 儿 serves to distinguish 哪儿 "where" from 哪 "which". Dialects that don't use erhua use 哪里 for "where".

Mandarin is wh-in-situ, so question words go in the same position as nouns and determiners, although like with any noun phrase, they can be fronted when they are the topic of the sentence (EDIT: actually, I'm not entirely sure if question words can be fronted). Like in colloquial German, 什么 (what) can also be used to mean "something":

你想买什么？
Nǐ xiǎng mǎi shénme?
[ni˧˥ ɕjɑŋ˧˥ maɪ̯˨˩ ʂən˧˥mɤ̆˨]
2[SG] want buy what/something
What do you want to buy?

你想买什么吗？
Nǐ xiǎng mǎi shénme ma?
[ni˧˥ ɕjɑŋ˧˥ maɪ̯˨˩ ʂən˧˥mɤ̆˨ mă˨]
2[SG] want buy what/something Q
Do you want to buy something?

[clawgrip]

I'll describe Japanese interrogatives then.

There are four non-derived interrogatives (I think they are non-derived):

何
nani
what

なぜ
naze
why

誰
dare
who

いつ
itsu
when

Why has alternative formations:
なんで nande ("by what"; derived from nani) and どうして dōshite ("how doing"; derived from dō, see below)

何 nan can be combined with counter words to ask how many, e.g.:
～枚 -mai counter for flat objects
何枚 nanmai how many flat objects

～人 -nin counter for people
何人 nannin how many people

～個 -ko counter for small objects
何個 nanko how many small objects


There are two with the stem iku-:

いくら
ikura
how much

いくつ
ikutsu
how many

-tsu is a generic counter word. Not clear on what -ra is.

There are a few interrogatives that derive from the demonstrative system. The system includes proximate, medial, distal, interrogative (ko so a do). All four pattern identically. So for example, kore (this), sore (that), are (that over there), dore (which one). The list of interrogative demonstratives includes:

どれ
dore
which one

どの
dono
which

どこ
doko
where

どちら
dochira
which way/which

どっち
dotchi
(abbreviation of the above)

どう
dō
how (states, events)

どうやって
dō yatte
how (actions)

どんな
donna
what kind of

We can see that dō combines with adverbial forms of verbs to make new question words (dōshite, dō yatte).

Interrogative pronouns are used in situ. Unlike Mandarin, they are unable to occupy topic position.

誰が来た？
Dare ga kita?
who NOM come-PST
Who came?

何本がいい？
Nanbon ga ii?
what-long.thing NOM be.good
How many sticks (etc.) do you want?

Indefinite pronouns are formed by combining the appropriate interrogative pronoun with the interrogative particle か ka. So:

何 nani what → 何か nanika something
誰 dare who → 誰か dareka someone
いくつ ikutsu how many → いくつか ikutsuka several; numerous (things)
etc.

This can also be done with nan + counter word as mentioned above, e.g.:

何枚 nanmai how many (flat objects) → 何枚か nanmaika some/several (flat objects)

[cntrational]

European languages also happen to merge the question and relative pronouns, a regional feature.

[GrandPiano]

-tsu is a generic counter word. Not clear on what -ra is.

So Japanese does have a generic counter word like 个 (traditional: 個) in Mandarin? I was under the impression that it doesn't.

[Lao Kou]

-tsu is a generic counter word.

So Japanese does have a generic counter word like 个 (traditional: 個) in Mandarin? I was under the impression that it doesn't.

How else, for example, would you propose counting off miscellaneous items in a box: a banana, a handkerchief, a squirt gun, a magazine, a rubber band, a hat? Muttsu (6) (Japanese also has 個 as -ko). And should one know the appropriate classifier for absolutely everything (and use them actively in conversation)?

[GrandPiano]

-tsu is a generic counter word.

So Japanese does have a generic counter word like 个 (traditional: 個) in Mandarin? I was under the impression that it doesn't.

How else, for example, would you propose counting off miscellaneous items in a box: a banana, a handkerchief, a squirt gun, a magazine, a rubber band, a hat? Muttsu (6) (Japanese also has 個 as -ko). And should one know the appropriate classifier for absolutely everything (and use them actively in conversation)?

Well, theoretically, in a language that has classifiers but not a generic one: a) There could be a classifier used specifically for groups of miscellaneous things, but that can't be used for things that have another classifier. b) There could be a few classifiers broad enough that most things go with one of them, but not one classifier that can be used with everything.

[clawgrip]

～つ -tsu is a weird one because it only goes up to nine. Also, in my experience, children generally default to ～個 -ko when they don't know which to use; they're not as likely to use ～つ. Counting items in a box, I might also be inclined to use ～個 -ko. I am not a native speaker though.

Also this is all off topic, but how many counter words do people typically use conversationally in Chinese? Because people use a pretty wide variety of them in Japanese even in conversation.

[GrandPiano]

Also this is all off topic, but how many counter words do people typically use conversationally in Chinese? Because people use a pretty wide variety of them in Japanese even in conversation.

I don't have enough experience to answer that, unfortunately. I do know that just using 个 with everything will make you sound uneducated or make it obvious that you're not a native speaker (e.g. if you say 一个书 yí ge shū instead of 一本书 yì běn shū for "one book"), and that most people don't know every classifier, but I don't know which classifiers are likely to be used in a casual conversation beyond a few really common ones. Lao Kou or DesEsseintes can probably tell you, though.

[Lao Kou]

how many counter words do people typically use conversationally in Chinese?

My guess would have been in the mid-to-high tens. My Li & Thompson (Mandarin) says there are "several dozen" and Matthews & Yip (Cantonese) says "over sixty". So there ya go.

Edit: It occurred to me that my Taiwanese dictionary has a Mandarin-Taiwanese counter word index in the back. For Mandarin, they listed a cursory count of ±155. I'd probably knock out about 15 that didn't strike me as particularly conversational or as thrown in rather arbitrarily (if you include units of time or Chinese currency, then why not include units of weight or volume, which will kick your numbers up?). That leaves about 140 which seem mostly vernacular and ready to rock. Yeah, that more or less seems right.)

[Davush]

Kuwaiti Arabic (and Gulf Arabic in general) usually has wh-fronted questions.

šinhu tabī?
what you.want?
What do you want?

wēn itrūḥ?
where you.go?
Where are you going?

mita raḥ ityī?
when FUT you.come?
When will you come?

wh-in situ questions are common in other dialects though, especially Egyptian.

Interrogatives in Kuwaiti are:

šinhu / šinhi - what (from Classical Arabic ayyu-shayɁin-huwa/hiya 'which thing is it')
ayy - which (e.g. ayy kitāb? which book?)
mita - when
šlōn - how (from ēš-lōn 'which colour')
lēš - why (from li-ēsh 'for what')
š-ḥaggah - why, what for (from ēsh-ḥagg-ah 'what its-for')
wēn - where

[clawgrip]

how many counter words do people typically use conversationally in Chinese?

My guess would have been in the mid-to-high tens. My Li & Thompson (Mandarin) says there are "several dozen" and Matthews & Yip (Cantonese) says "over sixty". So there ya go.

Edit: It occurred to me that my Taiwanese dictionary has a Mandarin-Taiwanese counter word index in the back. For Mandarin, they listed a cursory count of ±155. I'd probably knock out about 15 that didn't strike me as particularly conversational or as thrown in rather arbitrarily (if you include units of time or Chinese currency, then why not include units of weight or volume, which will kick your numbers up?). That leaves about 140 which seem mostly vernacular and ready to rock. Yeah, that more or less seems right.)

I looked on Wikipedia at at least of Japanese ones. The list has 133, and I cut about 23 or so out of that (minutes, hours, seconds, and some rare ones, like ones that don't come up when I try to type them, or ones that regular people would definitely use a simpler counter word for). So around 110 for Japanese. I think the weirdest one (which is not really rare, either), and let me quote GrandPiano:

日语的来自英语的外来语太多了。
El japonés tiene demasiados préstamos léxicos ingleses.
Japanese has too many English loanwords.

頁 is pronounced pēji and is the counter word for pages.

[Lao Kou]

Edit: For Mandarin, they listed a cursory count of ±155. I'd probably knock out about 15 that didn't strike me as particularly conversational or as thrown in rather arbitrarily (if you include units of time or Chinese currency, then why not include units of weight or volume, which will kick your numbers up?). That leaves about 140 which seem mostly vernacular and ready to rock.)

I looked on Wikipedia at at least of Japanese ones. The list has 133, and I cut about 23 or so out of that (minutes, hours, seconds, and some rare ones, like ones that don't come up when I try to type them, or ones that regular people would definitely use a simpler counter word for). So around 110 for Japanese.

One gets the impression that if the 2 人の外人 really cared enough to refine their culls, Japanese and Chinese would probably be running about neck and neck.

[clawgrip]

I feel like whoever wrote that list was trying to artificially inflate it though. For example, it listed 人 -ri (e.g. hitori, futari) and 人 -nin (e.g. sannin, yonin) as separate counters. Really they're just suppletive forms of a single counter word.