Structure question... - Page 2

@rambo2fit @FilipinoChatAdmin @calinga You're always welcome, rambo2 fit!I should have added there that "naniniwala NA binata si George" is the same as "naniniwalaNG binata si George".

@Tagamanila Always coming through for us! Good to know thank you for clarifying.

I think the first one has the "ng' to link "do you believe' to "George is single' and it sounds more natural too. Without the linker I think everyone still knows what you mean it's just not proper sentence structure. It's like two incomplete phrases mashed together at that point (which is actually my specialty haha). Broken Tagalog or Filipino.The second example doesn't flow and the "na' seems out of place. "Na' can't be the linker because "ba' ends in vowel and is not a noun and "na' also doesn't need to be there to mean "now' because the sentence is already present tense. I think there is no purpose for it there. I could be wrong too.

The linkers seem to be hard for me to wrap my mind around at times. Sometimes it just flows and sometimes I think about them but get the structure wrong. Could it also be ng in there? Ng being a noun marker/linker when it is not the subject of the sentence and not following and adjective?

Good info here but I still can't get to the bottom of this> Saan ka bang bumili ng roomba? / Where did you buy the roombe?I came up with this earlier but was informed that ba+ng is not correct here and that is should be: Saan ka ba bumili ng roomba?I'm just trying to figure out why? So I can figure out how to get it right in the future.> Pwede bang magtanong?Why is it bang in this example?When searching all the examples of bang on this site, I hardly ever see the bang where bang = "ba na" for "that" and doesn't look like it applies here anyway. Can someone please explain to me when and why bang, kang, kong, mong are used one and for all?

@AMBoy
I think it's tough to give a generalized rule that covers all cases...For your second example, this is a common pattern for pseudo verbs + verb
Ex:
Meron bang nangyari kanina?
Gusto kong uminom ng kape.
Kailangan kong bumoto.

@TLDCAdmin Yeah, I had finally learned that, and that's why I thought it applied to my sentence too despite not having a pseudo verb.Gusto kong uminom ng kape. - I want to drink coffee.
Gusto ko ng kape. - I want coffee.But still I don't know why my examples in the previous posts are the way they are.

Update: This is from Ger the pinoy linguist ! I will just take a few hours to research what all these words mean, and I should have my answer. I'm glad there was an answer.Here's the answer to your question:
Pwede bang bumili ng roomba
you have ba + na because "pwede" takes an entire clause as a complement
na introduces subordinate clauses
Saan ka ba bumili ng roomba
There's no subordinate clause there
The declarative version of that sentence is something like Bumili ka ng roomba sa SM
"Saan", the question pronoun, replaces the noun phrase "sa SM"
And then, like question words often do, it gets moved to the front of the sentence
*Saan bumili ka ng roomba
But clitics have to go in the second position in the sentence, so you get the right order
Saan ka bumili ng roomba
You want to add ba in, it goes after the pronoun clitics:
Saan ka ba bumili ng roomba
There's no subordinate clause here, so no need for "na"