We know that you can combine reflexive and causative suffixes. The suffixes can be interpreted in two ways:
- The causative comes before the reflexive (the subject causes themselves to do something): jIQuch'eghmoH I cause myself to be happy.
- The causative comes after the reflexive (the subject causes someone else to do something): Qo'noS tuqmey muvchuqmoH qeylIS. Kahless united the tribes of Kronos. (paq'batlh)
We are interested in the second interpretation.
There is no transitive verb "be friend", so I'm not sure what verb you would attach -chuq to. Let's say we use parHa'.
parHa'chuq HoD yaS je. The captain and the officer like each other.
HoD yaS je vIparHa'chuqmoH. I cause the captain and the officer to like each other.
If you add -choH or -qa', you are emphasising that there is change in state. Again, the suffixes can be interpreted in different ways depending on context:
HoD yaS je vIparHa'chuqqa'moH. I cause again that the captain and the officer like each other. OR I cause that the captain and the other like each other again.
The correct interpretation depends on context.
The verb moj become itself implies a change of
state in a way that parHa' like does not. HoDvaD
yaSvaD je juppu' vImojmoH does not benefit from having a
type 3 verb suffix included, because the meaning is not "change
from non-friends to friends," it is "start becoming friends" or
"resume the process of becoming friends that had been
interrupted," but does not distinguish whether the captain and
officer were previously friends before, which is what Qa'yIn wants
to know.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name