A question regarding <eyk>

[Tsamsiyu92]

Oel t<eyk>aron poti
I made him hunt.

1. What about si verbs, does the <eyk> make them transitive like this?

Po-l oe-ti eltu s<eyk><er><äng>i.
He is making me pla attention (ugh).

2. And my other question. what would i do if want to say: "I made him kill that vipervolf" for instance? Does the vipervolf take the dative then like this?

Oe-l poan-it tsp<eyk><ol>ang nantang-ur.

Or is there another way to "make someoen verb something"?

[MIPP]

Oel t<eyk>aron poti
I made him hunt.

1. What about si verbs, does the <eyk> make them transitive like this?

Po-l oe-ti eltu s<eyk><er><äng>i.
He is making me pla attention (ugh).

2. And my other question. what would i do if want to say: "I made him kill that vipervolf" for instance? Does the vipervolf take the dative then like this?

Oe-l poan-it tsp<eyk><ol>ang nantang-ur.

Or is there another way to "make someoen verb something"?

You never use <eyk> to make verbs with si transitives. You only use <eyk> with them, when you mean to say "obligate".
Here a quote from na'vi in a nutshell guide:

It's useful to think of si verbs as intransitive, but remember that
when it comes to direct objects, they have their own constructions (section 5.5). Only use
<eyk> with them if you specifically want the "force/make" meaning.

.

About your second question, i think it is correct, but i'm not sure.

[wm.annis]

You never use <eyk> to make verbs with si transitives. You only use <eyk> with them, when you mean to say "obligate".
Here a quote from na'vi in a nutshell guide:

It's useful to think of si verbs as intransitive, but remember that
when it comes to direct objects, they have their own constructions (section 5.5). Only use
<eyk> with them if you specifically want the "force/make" meaning.

The Nutshell guide needs to be updated for this, I think.  The causative ‹eyk› does not necessarily have obligation or forcing overtones.  From Frommer's word list we have tìsraw s‹eyk›i, "to hurt (someone)" from tìsraw si "to hurt, to be painful." 

Oel t<eyk>aron poti
I made him hunt.

Because "hunt" is a transitive verb, you have to make the causee dative, oel teykaron por.  See below...

2. And my other question. what would i do if want to say: "I made him kill that vipervolf" for instance? Does the vipervolf take the dative then like this?

Oe-l poan-it tsp<eyk><ol>ang nantang-ur.

When a transitive verb is made causative, the original object of the transitive verb stays in the accusative (objective, in Frommer's terms).  The causee, as I say above, is in the dative.  So,

  po-l tspolang nantang-it
  oe-l po-ru tspeykolang nantang-it

Frommer discusses another possibility in this email, but the example I've given is probably the simplest.

[Tsamsiyu92]

Thank you for quick answears.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Oel t<eyk>aron poti
I made him hunt.

1. What about si verbs, does the <eyk> make them transitive like this?

Po-l oe-ti eltu s<eyk><er><äng>i.
He is making me pla attention (ugh).

2. And my other question. what would i do if want to say: "I made him kill that vipervolf" for instance? Does the vipervolf take the dative then like this?

Oe-l poan-it tsp<eyk><ol>ang nantang-ur.

Or is there another way to "make someoen verb something"?

1. That sentence is correct. In general though, causatives don't make verbs transitive, with si verbs this is usually done with a dative object although this isn't always the case, as annis says, the direct object of tìsraw si would be the accusative object of tìsraw seyki.

2. No, the original subject takes the dative. So it becomes: oel poanur nantangit tspeykolang. This gets confusing when you already have a dative object (e.g. he made her give the bow to me) which would probably use fa on the original subject.