Analyzing "happy holidays to you all"

[txura utral]

In Dr. Frommer's out of office auto reply, he has Ayftozä lefpom ayngaru nìwotx! translated as "happy holidays to you all!"
I'm quite new to Na'vi, but this sentence intrigued me, particularly because, as of yet, the site vocab does not have "happy" or "holiday" in it.
I know that ayngaru is a plural form of you with a dative suffix, so it should translate approximately to "to you all". I also noticed that nìwotx is "all", which seems slightly repetitive. I have concluded that ayftozä must be holidays, since it has the plural prefix ay, which leaves lefpom as happy. Unfortunately, this does not make sense, as there should be the marker -a- between the adjective "happy" and the noun "holiday".
Hopefully one of you intermediate speakers will be able to analyze this better.

[damp]

I'm quite new in Na'vi to, but Ayftozä have the prefix of plural ay, e ftozä must be holiday, in plural holidays. lefpom have th prefix le e fpom means well being, so must be like happy, ayngaru it is like you (plural) and nìwotx is all.

[Yoru]

This seems to be right, damp, but nevertheless interesting: If "lefpom" is an adjective formed of "fpom" - peace - with the prefix le-, we can learn something about grammatics from it: That means, that adjectives coming from nouns do NOT need the "(-)a(-)" to be connected, doesn't it?

[Alìm Tsamsiyu]

It is possible that he just didn't include the -a- because it is obvious which noun is being modified. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON THIS, but I'm pretty sure that when the meaning is made obvious by the context of the sentence, the '-fixes' are considered redundant and unnecessary.  In this case, the '-ru' dative marker makes it fairly clear that the adjective is most likely not modifying "aynga-", so the only other noun left in the sentence is "ayftozä".

This is what I think about it, but also there might be some strange morph of the -a- affix that turns it into -ä- in some cases, since we don't know with 100% certainty that the word for "holiday" is "ftozä," it could just as well be "ftoz."

The other part, "lefpom" for "happy" is a rough translation since it really means something more like "peaceful" or "well-being-ness," but the best we have with our current vocabulary.  Since this is the form he is using (and he has access to the full vocabulary), I imagine that this is the way happy is said, even though it seems a little bit of a stretch.

[edmoreira]

I think that
ayftozä lefpom ayngaru nìwotx
is short for
ayftozä lefpom ayngaru nìwotx livu
the verb is dropped in the same way that it's  is dropped in
Eywa ngahu (livu) may Eywa be with you
or in
Oeru txoa (livu) may forgiveness be for me (or may I have forgiveness)

Further evidence for this is the use of the adverb nìwotx (where is the verb the adverb modifies? it means completely more than in means complete, right?)

ay.ftozä         le.fpom       ay.nga.ru nì.wotx            l.iv.u
holiday.PL ADJ.well-being PL.you.DAT  ADV.complete be<SUBJ>
Happy Holidays                for you        completely   may be
or
May the holidays be completely happy for you

If that's the case then it's ok that lefpom doesn't have the a marker since it's not used when the adjective is linked to the noun through the verb lu

Moreover, if what we've been discussing about the possessive dative (check http://forum.learnnavi.org/index.php?topic=587.0 ) is correct, it could be translated as:
May you all have completely (or wholly) happy holidays



Eywa Ngahu

Etx

[damp]

what <iv> means ?
ex: l<iv>u

[edmoreira]

what <iv> means ?
ex: l<iv>u

it was concluded by the grammar savy people who roam these fora that it's a subjunctive marker so  in the analysis above is translated as the "may" 

[bagget00]

yay, we now have sorta new vocab words. \o/

eywa ngahu

[Alìm Tsamsiyu]

Applause ngaru, ma edmoreira.

Nìtxan nìltsan soleii, nang! Nga txantslusam lu!

[edmoreira]

Applause ngaru, ma edmoreira.

Nìtxan nìltsan soleii, nang! Nga txantslusam lu!

irayo ma tsmuktu