Is this ok?

[Fkeu Taronyu]

I'm seriously working hard on learning Na'vi, and one day I had a random and sudden burst of poetic-ness.  So I decided to direct it at someone, and this is what I got:

Oel new ne nìn mì ngayä menariit(?), ulte peng, "Oel ngati Kameie, tutee ta oeyä ayunil."

Not sure what to do about the accusative, is that right?

P.S.:  New signature!

[NeotrekkerZ]

1.  To do the infinitive after want use the subjunctive.
2.  As far as I can tell there is no direct object, therefore it is not a transitive sentence and no ergative is needed.
3.  I assume the double ee on tutee is to show stress?  We don't write stress explicitly, so just tute.
4.  There's an error on the genitive for your.

All in all I would write it as "Oe new nivìn mì ngeyä menari ulte peng, 'Oel ngati kameie, tute ta oeyä ayunil.'"

[Kiliyä]

First off, thanks for posting!  Best way to learn, I've learnt!

Anyhoo, there's a few things going on here that should be different.

The -l suffix is when the subject of the verb is doing something directly to something else.  (Confused?)  Lemme show you: the man bites the dog.  In that sentence, the man, the one biting, takes the ergative -l.  The dog, sadly, takes the -ti, being the object of the man's ravenous hunger.  Generally cases and prepositions don't seem to mix well, but that's just from what I've seen in Na'vi.

ne nìn:  Where is nìn from?  I've not seen it before.  The word "to" in English has a number of meanings.  In this instance, it's introducing us to an infinitive verb.  Na'vi shows infinitives using the <iv> infix.  So, I'm guessing that your wanting to say something like "to look into your eyes" or words  to that effect... "to look" in Na'vi is tìng nari.  The <iv> nestles itself into tìng like so: t<iv>ìng.

From what we have, it seems ngayä becomes ngeyä instead.

The accusative case has a couple of forms: -t or -ti for words ending in a vowel, or -it for words ending in a consonant.  Here, since nari ends in a vowel, you'd use -t or -ti.

Quotes are handled with words rather than punctuation in Na'vi.  Opening quotes is san, closing is sìk.  There is a thread about their usage floating around somewhere – take a look.

When you are addressing a specific person (not sure about more than one...), there is a little word ma that fits in before their name or title or whatever it is you're calling them.  So, oel ngati kameie, ma tute...  (since, like neotrekkerz said, you don't need the double -ee-)

Otherwise, all good!  Nice!

[NeotrekkerZ]

I agree about the vocative ma.  Good catch.

Where is nìn from?

This is in Taronyu's dictionary, and it's sourced.  It means to look (at).

[Fkeu Taronyu]

Ah, so much useful information, I don't know where to start!

Ok, so according to http://content.learnnavi.org/taronyu/NaviDictionary.pdf, nìn means look, look at.

Tutee:  I said that because of gender.  Don't you make a word feminine with the e suffix?  E.g. 'itan and 'ite

My fault on the ergative and accusative, I was thinking that every sentence had to have one of each!  It was getting confusing!

Thanks for pointing out ngeyä, I never would've known that..

So how does ma work?  Do you use it every single time you're addressing someone?  Or do you only use it when you're addressing someone in certain cases?  E.g. When you use their exact name.

I've also heard somewhere (I think it was on Wikipedia) that Kame is always capitalized because you're seeing in the spiritual sense.  Is this true?

So overall, what I'm getting from this is that it should be:

Oe new nivìn mì ngeyä menari, ulte peng, san oel ngati Kameie, ma tute(e) ta oeyä ayunil sìk.

[Kiliyä]

Ok, so according to http://content.learnnavi.org/taronyu/NaviDictionary.pdf, nìn means look, look at.

Yeah, I missed it, since the way it's formatted means I can't search for nìn exactly... sorry about that!  In that case, nivìn would be nìn with the <iv> infix, as you've done.

Tutee:  I said that because of gender.  Don't you make a word feminine with the e suffix?  E.g. 'itan and 'ite

It seems that when an e and an e meet, they become one e, rather than two.  But the stress changes from túte to tuté for the feminine form.  Well done on the parenthesis for it.  I was going to suggest it until I realised you'd put them in already!

My fault on the ergative and accusative, I was thinking that every sentence had to have one of each!  It was getting confusing!

Yeah, it can get that way.  English only has the remnants of its case system - in pronouns is about all.  Think of he, him, his or she, her, hers.  Instead, English uses where the word is in the sentence to determine its "case".  But in the sentence I gave before, we could do "the dog the man bites" or other variations using cases and still know who bit whom (hey look, another English case!  w00t!).

So how does ma work?  Do you use it every single time you're addressing someone?  Or do you only use it when you're addressing someone in certain cases?  E.g. When you use their exact name.

When you're addressing them directly.  Like, "oh doctor!  I'm sick!" or "Oh mom!"  Actually, I think the traditional "oh" is pretty good for a translation.  Or "O God, who art..." etc.  It's called the vocative - meaning used for when you're calling on or to something.

I've also heard somewhere (I think it was on Wikipedia) that Kame is always capitalized because you're seeing in the spiritual sense.  Is this true?

Dunno about that.  I avoid Wikipedia mostly.  I think that "see" in the phrase "I See you" was capitalised for English speakers to differentiate it from physically seeing, but it doesn't matter in Na'vi.  And even more so since 1) it's not a written language, so there's no capitalisation whatsoever and 2) anyone reading the Na'vi word and translating it will know that it means "the other see"!

So overall, what I'm getting from this is that it should be:
Oe new nivìn mì ngeyä menari, ulte peng, san oel ngati Kameie, ma tute(e) ta oeyä ayunil sìk.

Yup, with or without the commas and the Kapital Letter.

Nicely done.

[NeotrekkerZ]

Quote from: Fkeu Taronyu on Today at 06:38:55 PM
I've also heard somewhere (I think it was on Wikipedia) that Kame is always capitalized because you're seeing in the spiritual sense.  Is this true?

In Frommer's letter kame is not capitalized.  Only if it starts the sentence would it be so.