Are you saying that any QAO *construction* is just ungrammatical? I
was under the impression that what was considered incorrect was
*misinterpreting* the question word in a QAO sentence as a relative
pronoun.

We got our first question-as-object sentence from Okrand in TalkNow!: nuq Datlhutlh DaneH What do you want to drink? This supports the idea that you can use the pronoun-like (not relative pronoun) question words nuq and 'Iv in the place of the answer, just as TKD describes, even if it's in the first sentence of a sentence-as-object construction.

Would anyone on this mailing list even blink if they heard a Klingon
ask {'Iv vIHoH DaneH}? Or misinterpret it as "you want who I kill"?

I would blink, because I'd be thinking, "Oh, it's a question-as-object construction, but it's one of the okay ones."

I actually think {chay' veSDuj'a' vIghajlaH DaH 'e' boyajchoH} is a
perfectly grammatical Klingon sentence, just one that doesn't mean
what Krankor wrote it means.

If it's grammatical, I don't understand what it means.

In fact, I think Klingon can express certain questions more
economically and precisely than English.

{chay' maSuv 'e' ra'} "how did he order us to fight? (i.e., he ordered
us to fight; what manner of fighting did he order us to do?)"

This does *not* mean "he commanded how we fight" as a statement, and
it can be contrasted with:
{maSuv chay' 'e' ra'} "how did he order us to fight? (i.e., did he
talk to us in person, did he send a coded communique by subspace, did
he send us a message by courier, etc.?)"

nuqDaq bItlhutlh DaneH
where do you want to drink?

ghorgh bItlhutlh DaneH
when do you want to drink?

HIq 'ar Datlhutlh DaneH
how many ales do you want to drink?

chay' Datlhutlh DaneH
how do you want to drink?

But, as you say, I wouldn't accept sentences in which the question word is being used as a relative pronoun.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name