Ex. To take v.s. To be taken

I just use kos and its forms, as in English. If there's another way, I do not know it. This is how I'd do it:

Past tense: drey kuz vs. lost kuz -- did take vs. was taken (NOTE: careful with lost! This could also mean "has taken" because lost means both "have" and "was". When something "has happened", most people use the suffix -aan.)

Present: kuz vs. kos kuz -- take vs. be taken 

   OR kuz vs. los kuz -- take vs. is taken 

   OR kuz vs. kosaan kuz -- take vs. has been taken

Future: fen kuz vs. fen kos kuz -- will take vs. will be taken

Hope that helped! Also, for future reference, we have a question board made just for things like this. :) Feel free to post there or message me if you have any more questions!

I would use the suffixes to show passive

Ooh, what suffixes?

I'm not aware of any suffixes that can show passive. Aaliizah is correct in using lost and kos.

paarthurnax

I'm not aware of any suffixes that can show passive. Aaliizah is correct in using lost and kos.

Should there be a suffix to make a verb passive? You could make one from lost, i.e. -ost, so take drun (to make/bring) and add -ost, to make drunost (to be made/brought)?

That's certainly an interesting idea! The suffix you came up with sounds good, too. Personally, now that I think about it, I don't think the dov would speak in the passive voice very often because they're not a very passive people. Dov wahlaan fah rel. I feel like that's the kind of mentality they would have. For example, the sentence "My father's sword was stolen by a thief!" would probably be phrased as "Tafiir lost gahrot bormahi zahkrii!" (You could also omit lost entirely and leave it up to context, but I know that isn't really what we're talking about here). So I don't know if they would really need a suffix specifically for speaking in a passive way. 

But you know what? I'm sure we've come up with plenty of rules and words because they work for English speakers without considering the way the dov think. Take it up with paarthurnax! He's always open to discuss new ideas.

Aaliizah

That's certainly an interesting idea! The suffix you came up with sounds good, too. Personally, now that I think about it, I don't think the dov would speak in the passive voice very often because they're not a very passive people. Dov wahlaan fah rel. I feel like that's the kind of mentality they would have. For example, the sentence "My father's sword was stolen by a thief!" would probably be phrased as "Tafiir lost gahrot bormahi zahkrii!" (You could also omit lost entirely and leave it up to context, but I know that isn't really what we're talking about here). So I don't know if they would really need a suffix specifically for speaking in a passive way. 

But you know what? I'm sure we've come up with plenty of rules and words because they work for English speakers without considering the way the dov think. Take it up with paarthurnax! He's always open to discuss new ideas.

 

Yeah I hope to do so, but I guess it really boils down to the fluency of the language. You can, for the most part, rephrase any passive statement as an active statement but it can loose its impact. but a suffix that makes any verb passive could be useful for something like poetry or story-telling

I can see how that would be convenient. :)

I agree with Aaliizah that dragons would be more inclined toward the active voice. It's not impossible to express in canon, either, just a bit difficult. I think it's an interesting difference between English and Dovahzul, and one that we might diminish by creating such a suffix.