>>>Also, alternate line of getting to this word. There are pairs between such pronouns and their answers, like when - then, where - there, which one - that one, and we miss the question side for "such".
>>
>>Maybe not every answer has a question. Wooden is an adjective, and it would be difficult to formulate a question so specific as to require that the only answer be a specific adjective.
>
>Too bad, English is then missing a very useful word. Also, it has its negative answer - nikakav (same in Russian, IIRC, just prefix it with a ni-), pretty much the way you have where-nowhere, one-none, (don't know about how-nohow, why-nowhy, but these exist in my language and a few others), there's also this whatlike/nothinglike (assuming that "whatlike" would be the missing word that we are chasing), whatfor/nothingfor (which actually can have two meanings, "they jailed me nothingfor" and "I'm not going out nothingfor", i.e. not doing it no matter what reason may come up).

>
>I have almost forgotten about this. It's like a bug minefield - you employ workarounds without thinking, and only during refactoring you remember why are you always doing it this way and never that way ("ovako" and "onako"... "thisly" and "thatly").

I don't see the big deal about it. If you ask, "What is this door made of?" and somebody replies, "Wood", then you know it's a wooden door. Doesn't seem like much of a work-around to me. So what if there is no question to which the only possible definitive answer is 'wooden'.