Adjectival Puns

I came across a gap in my knowledge that I don't even know how to Google for. I am putting my various official documents in thematic folders, and I want to label them in German. I am not sure how I can label them in a natural way.

In my native Greek, an adjective in the right gender and number from would suffice, and the noun (e.g. the word for documents) can be omitted. In English, which I don't speak natively, I think that's not an option. The natural way would be to write e.g. "medical documents" in full.

Does German pattern with Greek or in English on this one? Can I label the folder "Medizinische" (plural, implied "Dokumente"), or "Medizinisch" (citation form), or perhaps it's ungrammatical to use just the adjective in this context?

Example: She read the book that I gave her.

Do most natural languages reuse the interrogative pronouns as relative pronouns? I was thinking of only having one interrogative pronoun "what" in my conlang and then just asking "What place", "What time", "What one", "What person", "What manner", "What purpose", etc. But now I am pondering how to handle relative pronouns.

Does anyone have any interesting ways of embedding dependent adjectival clauses in their conlang sentences that is different than English?

Adjectival clauses seem to be able to be used as nominal clauses in English. Example: "Why you did that is a mystery to me." But if your conlang does not have relative pronouns then how would one embed adjectival clauses as nominal clauses?

I’ve noticed there are some Spanish nouns that have different adjectival forms from the noun,eg - frontera vs fronterizo/a, salud vs sanitario/a, costa vs costero/a, as opposed to others like “él es un humano”/“el cuerpo humano”, or “la piedra”/“la casa de piedra”.

I know English does this too (eg ‘ocular health’ vs ‘eyes’, though ‘eye health’ would be fine there too), so it seems like it’s something that just needs to be encountered/memorized. My googling has failed me, anyone have a resource they can point to on this?

In the following sentence, the word modern is in the masculine form, but I think it ought to be in the feminine.

"Les droits de l'homme sont parfois présentés comme une invention occidentale modern"

In this sentence, shouldn't both the adjective 'occidentale' and 'modern' be in the feminine?

And in general if there are two adjectives in the same sentence, do they all need to be in gender agreement?

I'm reading a Swedish children's book and it contains the following:

>Även Pandoras syster, Sophie, hade följt med eftersom hon inte ville missa något av allt det roliga.

I understand the sense, I think, something like "Even Pandora's sister, Sophie, had come along because she didn't want to miss all the fun". But "roliga" is an adjective whereas "fun" is a noun, so I guess this is an adjectival noun structure, something like "lo divertido" in Spanish. So I have some questions and I'm finding this impossible to google since I just get loads of Swedish Grammar 101 pages about adjectival agreement with nouns.

So in these cases, would the adjective always be in the definite form, and would the determiner always be the neuter 'det'? Is the structure "allt det <definite adjective>" common - googling this I found songs called "Allt det vackra" and "Allt det gamla det är slut"? Is there anything else I should know about this?

Hi,

I'm pretty new in learning Japanese, so please forgive and correct me if I'm wrong in my presumptions.

My main source of learning Japanese was Cure Dolly and she says that な-adjectives are actually nouns (adjectival nouns). So, while modifying a noun with a な-adjective we are actually making a relative clause. So, normally, if:
"X が Y だ." (where Y is an adjectival noun)

Modifying X with "being-Y" would normally be:
"Y だ X は Z".

However, instead of "だ", we use "な":
"Y な X は Z".

However, if Y is not an adjectival noun (a な-adjective) but just a usual noun, we can still say:
"X が Y だ." (where Y is not an adjectival noun but a noun)

But we cannot form a relative clause as before like:
"Y な X は Z." (where Y is not an adjectival noun but a noun)

Instead, you have to do this:
"Y の X は Z."

Maybe you could say that "だ becomes a な in relative clause if the noun is an adjectival noun and の if it is not" but as I know, that's not the case. In that case, I think of の as more like a possessive particle than a form of だ, which means that "X belongs to the group of Ys". In the end, the meaning might be the same (or very similar at least) but still there are different mechanisms at work here. And I want to know the reason.

So, basically it comes down to this:

Can we say that "To be able to form a relative clause with the copular verb (だ), the subject complement (Y) that copular verb couples to the subject (X) has to be an adjectival noun (in which case だ becomes な). If it is not an adjectival noun, you cannot form a relative clause with it. However, you can give a similar meaning with の"? Because that seems like the only logical explanation here but I would like to hear it if there is another.

Thanks.

I know one place where it makes sense to think of きれい as a noun rather than an adjective. The sentence 花がきれいだ has a parallel structure to 花がバラだ. On the other hand, a sentence that ends in an adjective (花が赤い) does not need a copula to be a complete sentence.

I'm also aware that adjectival nouns act very similar to nouns in compound sentences, and when "conjugated" into the past tense or negative form. I know nouns technically don't conjugate, and you are really conjugating the copula, but you know what I mean.

But what I'm wondering about is whether there are contexts where the meaning of adjectival nouns is closer to a noun than an adjective? Is there a context where the meaning of きれい (for example) is closer to "pretty thing" or "prettiness" than "pretty"?

Hola todos

Aprendía sobre adjectival clauses y por lo que sé, las oraciones de abajo deberían ser en el subjuntivo pero cuando yo comprobé en un traductor (reverso context), no me dio el subjuntivo. ¿Porque? Son correctas?

¿Hay un gato que corre rápido? ¿Conoces a un gato que corre rápido?

Yo traté de cambiar uno de los dos ejemplos un poco y me dio el subjuntivo: ¿Conoces a un gato que pueda correr rápido?

So I was wondering something for some time, and it's come up in creative writing endeavors and other such things for me a few times: what would be the adjectival form of Albion? Like for a fantasy setting that uses 'Albion' in place of 'England' or 'Britain', what is the equivalent of 'British' or 'English'? Is it just Albion?

I mean Albion is an archaic real world toponym and I know English writers have used it poetically, surely at some point someone needed to use it in an adjectival sense?

After the book about Conjugation Tables, I've now finished the Adjectival Forms. The next book I'll write will be about Nominal Forms, it will take time though.

At the moment, only the Verbs and Adjectives books are available, but this is my project

You can download the books for free here: rlf-arabiye - ENGLISH (weebly.com)

Just wondering if there are any patterns for knowing whether the comparative ending would be -ari or -ri

-legri is common for -legur in comparative, and most other times it's -ari. This isn't including -lli and -nni instances i.e. geðrænni.

Sorry if I'm sounding nonsensical, but is there a reason why 'krumpaður' becomes 'krumpaðri' in comparative but 'lífsglaður' becomes 'lífsglaðari' in comparative?

Much appreciated :)

Like in english where its General opinion, specific opinion, size, shape, age, color, origin and construction

So you can have a big round balloon but not a round big balloon, what is this order in french

Adjectival nouns, nominalization of adjectives and substantivized adjectives; are they all the same name / term for adjective as nouns?

Like these cities in this list

I'm an Indonesian and there are only 3 of our cities listed on that list. Since there are no "official" adjectival & demonym forms for many cities in my country (including the city where I live), how do I make them up? Are there some sort of rules that I could look up to?

Kanto - Kantonian, confirmed in Ultra Sun & Ultra Moon through the Kantonian Gym.

Johto - Johtonian, confirmed in the Official Ultra Sun & Ultra Moon Guide.

Hoenn - Hoennian, confirmed in the Official Ultra Sun & Ultra Moon Guide.

Sinnoh - Sinnohan, confirmed in Sun & Moon through the Poffins on sale in the Thrifty Megamart.

Unova - Unovan, confirmed in Pokémon Shield through Terrakion's Dex entry.

Kalos - Kalosian, confirmed in X & Y through Kiloude City's description.

Alola - Alolan, confirmed in Sun & Moon through Alolan Forms.

Galar - Galarian, confirmed in Sword & Shield through Galarian Forms.

Personally, these all seemed pretty obvious except for Hoennian. I would've gone with Hoennite, it doesn't sound as jarring as the official term.

Thoughts on the side regions? I would guess they're: Seviian, Orren, Fioren, Almian, Oblivian and Pasionnite.

I am teaching a student about to infinitives. We've learned that 'to+infinitive' can act as noun, adjective, or adverb as in:

I want to sleep. (nominal)

I need somebody to love. (adjectival)

I went there to meet her. (adverbial)

But what does this infinitive do in:

a. He believes her to be kind.

b. I want you to stay*. (I thought want, an catenative verb, requires a complement. So here the to infinitive is in a complement position, but is it nominal?)*

c. She doesn't seem to feel the cold.

Are these infinitives nominal, or adjectival?

I recently found all the rules of english adjectival order (i.e. big red balloon, not red big ballon) and was wondering if german has rules on the order of adjectives.

...because in the 10th anniversary edition of Elantris it is quite simply Teo

and I was actually surprised that in Emperor’s Soul it’s Teoish

Is this just an inconsistency or something else???

Hello, everyone. I'm new to the app, so I'm not sure how to use it very well.

I've been wondering why in Romanian these two sentences are different:

1. "Fata cea frumoasă".

2. "Fata frumoasă".

While looking for an answer, I saw many books saying the second sentence is ambiguous, but I can't understand why. Can anyone explain it?

Thanks in advance.

If one were to describe an elevator, they might use "claustrophobic", which is understood, but isn't it technically incorrect? The elevator induces feelings of claustrophobia but isn't claustrophobic itself. Is there an adjective to properly describe something like this?

Hello,

I have a questions regarding this topic, as we're studying this in my Spanish class, and I just wanted to clarify the topic.

From my understanding, for Adjectival Clauses (Adj.Cs), should I use the indicative ONLY if there is no change of subject AND if the Adj.C deals with something that is completed/habitual/factual?

My question is, whether a Adj.C has to meet BOTH criteria at the same time in order to use the indicative. So a for a sentence like:

"My friends always make me toast before they go to the beach" would this be, something like:

"Siempre mis amigos me hacen tostada antes de que van a la playa."

But if this happens:

"My friends always make me toast before I go to the beach" would this sentence then be something like:

"Siempre mis amigos me hacen tostada antes de que yo vaya a la playa"

Thank for you the help, you're doing me a big boi favor to flavor town!

Does the adjective go after the noun or before it... E.g. is it хорошая машина or машина хорошая.