Talk:Hoppala

@Fytcha, Mahagaja How is this noun and the alternative form Hoppla declined? Previously the headword said genitive Hoppala but the declension table said Hoppalas. I have guessed that both are possible. This word as a noun is not in any dictionaries. Benwing2 (talk) 04:47, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

@Benwing2, Mahagaja, Skunkassociation: The genitive is hard to attest; I've found two potential uses on Google Books but they didn't come with a preview, so I can't tell whether they are scannos or not. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 10:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, this is beyond my non-native intuition, and I can't find anything useful online either. I suppose the rarity of the substantival use of Hopp(a)la intersecting with the formality of the genitive makes instances hard to find. —Mahāgaja · talk 10:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Just speaking about intuition, I'd strongly prefer the genitive with -s: "das sind die Auswirkungen deines Hopplas" vs. "das sind die Auswirkungen deines Hoppla" First one sounds much better to my ear. And yes, I agree with the reason you give for why the genitive is hard to attest. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 10:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

With my native intuition, untainted by any dialect, both genitives are defensible, but I have never encountered this nominalisation. It’s a childish occasionalism converted from the interjection in the first place, hence the reluctance to add a genitive ending. From this we can maybe formulate a general rule: converted interjections can pass with and without the genitive -s, to follow general noun declension or to preserve the properties of the interjection. Fay Freak (talk) 16:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I've found a few examples of the genitive of Hoppala with -s via Google (des Hoppalas, dieses Hoppalas). To my native ear a genitive form without -s does sound ungrammatical. Skunkassociation (talk) 12:19, 26 February 2022 (UTC)