Meaningless replies to good questions

What about "he/she avoided/dodged/fudged/sidestepped/begged the question or beat around the bush"

All of #11 expressions are good descriptions of the situation.
The question we're all still working on is: what did he/she actually say to achieve this result (or non-result)?

Whatever...

Not so much what the speaker actually said (the speaker may have hemmed and hawed, just to throw in another expression) but what words we would put in the speaker's mouth to indicate that he said nothing meaningful.

I think we have established that there is no equivalent English expression.

Actually, I think #13 got it!

Also there's Non-sequitur. Norwegian (and Swedish) have a fun expression for it: "God dag, økseskaft" (Good day, axe-handle!). It comes from a folk-tale about a deaf man who was carving an axe-handle when a stranger approached him to ask the way to town, but the deaf man assumed he was asking about what he was carving. So the conversation went "Good day! - Axe-handle."

OK, veering off topic, but this is like one of my favorite Leo Rosten jokes. Maybe I can say it illustrates how much cultures can be alike.
Mr. Goldberg, who speaks only Yiddish, takes a transatlantic cruise. At dinner he is seated next to M. Dubois who speaks only French. M. Dubois turns to Mr. Goldberg & says "bon appétit!" Mr. Goldberg figures it's an introduction, so he replies "Goldberg." This goes on night after night until finally someone takes Mr. Goldberg aside and tells him "Listen, the French guy isn't telling you his name. He's saying 'Good Appetite,' that's what 'bon appétit' means."

"Ah!"says Goldberg and at the next meal he bows to M. Dubois and says "Bon Appetit!" M. Dubois beams and replies "Goldberg."

Is sth like "He talked a lot but told little." common in English as well?

Going off topic, wikipedia suggests that the pictured weapon is actually a subtype of morning star. At least the more common variety (without a chain) was supposedly still used in WW1 by Bosnian soldiers in Austro-Hungarian army.

Assuming wikipedia is right, then what makes a mace into a morning star is spikes. I thought (apparently along with a lot of other people) it was the chain that made a morning star. With a chain (or several), wikipedia says that what we've got (with or without spikes) is a miltary flail, not a morning star.

But the wikipedia article on flail (miltary) says that "'morning star' is an acceptable name for this weapon, especially as the name 'flail' is also used to describe a style of whip used for punishment."

I hadn't thought about its advantages to a horseman. It doesn't transmit vibrations back to the wielder on impact, so you're less likely to lose your seat.

Edited by: VinnyD

Thanks psw, I was beginning to despair! Interesting diversion on maces and whips, I will be a lot better informed next time I need to renew my stock! :-)