Is this right?

[Sayprìsä]

Please check for any errors.

Tsmuke sì oe t<ay>aron, tsakrr y<ay>om.
My friend (who is a girl) and I will hunt, then eat.

[Skxawng]

Please check for any errors.

Tsmuke sì oe t<ay>aron, tsakrr y<ay>om.
My friend (who is a girl) and I will hunt, then eat.

what you wrote was ...

"Sister and I will hunt, then will eat."  Needs 'my friend' ... I'd write it:

Oeyä 'eylan letute sì oe tayaron, ulte tsakrr yayom

My female friend and I will hunt, and then eat

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Please check for any errors.

Tsmuke sì oe t<ay>aron, tsakrr y<ay>om.
My friend (who is a girl) and I will hunt, then eat.

As omängum says, you've said your sister not your friend, it would probably be better as:

oeyä 'eylan-e

Also, tsakrr isn't really used like this (come to think of it, I'm not sure when you would use it), instead you should sre hrr a.

The <ay> in taron is implied in the second clause so isn't needed.

So you should get: oeyä 'eylane sì oe tayarob sre hrr a yom

[Kì'eyawn]

...Also, tsakrr isn't really used like this (come to think of it, I'm not sure when you would use it), instead you should sre hrr a.

Ma kemeoauniaea, where did you get the impression that tsakrr isn't used this way?  It seems to mean "[at] that time," so i would think this would be precisely the use for it.

Actually, i'm more troubled by tsakrr being used in "txo...tsakrr..." clauses, as the "then" in English "if-then" is more like "in that case," whereas, as i said before, tsakrr seems to mean "at that time."

Ngaytxoa for derailing the thread.

Edit: Changed *me to ma at the beginning; can't have me polluting the thread with bad Na'vi.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

I agree with you about the txo ... tsakrr but it seems we have to live with that to a certain degree.

As for tsakrr here the problem is that it would mean "my friend and I will hunt that time eat" which, really should require an "a" on the left hand side of tsakrr and even then would imply that you eat at the same time as hunter (which isn't now), you could fix this by using sre+ on tsakrr and putting the "a" after tsakrr but then the tsa isn't required and it reduces back to my sentence.

The problem with it is that tsakr can almost only be used in contexts when krr could be used just as correctly, the only counter examples I can think of are possibly the txo ... tsakrr (which I don't like) and discourse like the following:

Tute a'awve: moe tarmaron krr a palulukan 'oleko

Tute amuve: tsakrr po tamul

Here you could tsakrr instead of krr in the first person's dialogue but I can't see any reason not to use krr instead.

[Kì'eyawn]

Tam, ma tsmuk.  I think i understand what you mean. 

This might seem a bit simplistic, but why not use ulte tsakrr?  Might that remove the ambiguity?

[kewnya txamew'itan]

You could do, but to me that implies simultaneity again (we will hunt and at that time we will eat) so you'd still need a temporal adposition on tsakrr (probably maw) so ulte maw tsakrr.

[Kì'eyawn]

Hmm.  I see your point.  Blame it on my English/French bias, then.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

It's very difficult to get out of the habits of the languages you know, I really ought to learn some non-european language for example, as it is I only speak English, Spanish and am learning Danish, all of which have enough overlap in culture and history for it not to give a good picture of world language as a whole.