Some details on word-order

[Kì'eyawn]

Kaltxì ma smuktu,

So, it's possible i'm one of the only people who was surprised by this.  But i went to Karyu Pawl to ask about a sentence from one of the blog posts, and he set me straight.  So, for the edification of anyone else who might have been confused about this like i was:

On the Jan. Part 2 post, there's this sentence:

Tsat ke tsun oe ronsrelngivop.

I would've expected Ke tsun oe tsat ronsrelngivop.  I thought the object of the second verb has to come after the modal verb...?

Word order: Remember that Na'vi word order is extremely flexible. More so than in many if not most languages, definitely including English, you can permute the order of constituents without changing the semantics of who is doing what to whom.

Both sentences you've mentioned below are fine.

The one that begins with tsat—that is, with the object—is perhaps more "marked" than the version you gave, with more emphasis on the object. But keep in mind that we can do the same thing in English, as in "THAT I can't imagine!" Or: "Him I like; her I can't stand." Those are both object-initial sentences, which in English are stylistic variants of the more expected SVO order . . . but under certain circumstances they're acceptable. That's much more the case in Na'vi, where the word order rules permit lots of variation. For example, all 6 possible permutations of "Oel poti tse'a" are grammatical—which is not to say they're interchangeable in any particular conversation.

So feel free to experiment with different word orders. It's hard to go wrong in Na'vi.

So, apparently Na'viyä free word order is even more "free" than i thought! 

[Kamean]

So, apparently Na'viyä free word order is even more "free" than i thought! 

Like Russian.

[Carborundum]

OK, so a word at the beginning of a sentence is "marked", whereas a word at the end receives the "punch".

It's a good thing this isn't confusing at all.

[Kì'eyawn]

OK, so a word at the beginning of a sentence is "marked", whereas a word at the end receives the "punch".

It's a good thing this isn't confusing at all.

This.

[Plumps]

OK, so a word at the beginning of a sentence is "marked", whereas a word at the end receives the "punch".

It's a good thing this isn't confusing at all.

This.

Has anybody ever commented on the fact that this could be a misreading after all? It was for a newspaper contest if I remember correctly and was to mean "You're going down" with "Your tail is mine" in Na'vi ... has it occured to anybody that Dr. Frommer's comment for "The end of the sentence is where the 'punch' comes." could only apply for this particular sentence?
Just a thought ... to make it even more confusing

['Oma Tirea]

OK, so a word at the beginning of a sentence is "marked", whereas a word at the end receives the "punch".

It's a good thing this isn't confusing at all.

Except for some

[Ikran Ahiyìk]

OK, so a word at the beginning of a sentence is "marked", whereas a word at the end receives the "punch".

It's a good thing this isn't confusing at all.

Except for some

I think it's:

The last when you want it,
nothing when you don't.