Subjunctive aspect

[ruseya atan txonyä]

Kaltì!

Could someone try to make clear the subjunctive aspect to me?

From what is in the Pocket Guide, the appropriate infix for it is <iv>, which contracts to <<v>> if you use it combined with a tense infix.
As I understand it, you use it as an expression of what could have been, is that right? Is it also possible to use it in the present and future tense and what would that mean?

e.g.: If I wanted to say "I could eat a sandwich right now (but I have to finish this paper first...)"
would that translate to "Oe-ri 'sandwich'-ti set y<iv>om"?

Am I on the right track here?

[kewnya txamew'itan]

As far as we know, there are two main uses of the subjunctive in Na'vi.

The first is, as you described to indicate possibility, wishes or uncertainty (as in English, Spanish and I believe French and Latin).

The second, is the etymological meaning of the subjunctive in that it relates to verbs that join "under" another a verb in a way that in English would be an infinitive.

Good examples of this are the verbs new and tsun (to want and to be able), when combined with the verb taron (to hunt) it should take a subjunctive infix to indicate that it is an objective infinitive.

E.g.

oel new tivaron (I want to hunt)
oel tsun tivaron (I can/am able to hunt)
oel new pivawm (I want to ask)
oel tsun pivawm (I can/am able to ask)

I hope that helps.

As for your sentence, a topical isn't necessary, an ergative -l will do fine (why have people suddenly started using the topical so much, it's like a child who's just discovered animations in powerpoint) and sandwich will need an accusative  -ti on it.

Eywa ngahu.

[ruseya atan txonyä]

Irayo.

So whenever I use an auxiliary verb construction involving can/want to I use the subjunctive.
Is this used for all auxiliary verbs (like want to, need to, etc.) too or not? Or is it yet unknown?

I guess it's kind of like a vicious circle. A lot of people on the forum use the the -ri all the time and so new learners like me get used to seeing it everywhere and copy it. Someone's gotta stop that.    And Powerpoint animations are kind of addicting 
Oh ya right. Forgot about the case marker, since it was an English word. I'll add that.

[Kiliyä]

The second, is the etymological meaning of the subjunctive in that it relates to verbs that join "under" another a verb in a way that in English would be an infinitive.

Can you point me to the etymology of -iv- please?  And some examples of it being used as an infinitive in the corpus? (Or another thread that does so...)

Irayo.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Irayo.

So whenever I use an auxiliary verb construction involving can/want to I use the subjunctive.
Is this used for all auxiliary verbs (like want to, need to, etc.) too or not? Or is it yet unknown?

I guess it's kind of like a vicious circle. A lot of people on the forum use the the -ri all the time and so new learners like me get used to seeing it everywhere and copy it. Someone's gotta stop that.    And Powerpoint animations are kind of addicting 
Oh ya right. Forgot about the case marker, since it was an English word. I'll add that.

As far as we know, that is correct. At the moment of course, the corpus is small but the only example of that sort of sentence uses a subjunctive (It's a pleasure to be able to chat with you in Na'vi/Tsun   oe ngahu nìNa'vi p<iv>ängkxo a fì'u oeru prrte' lu)

As for the etymology ma Kiliyä, the wikipedia page gives at as the subjunctive/conjunctive mood from subjunctive/conjunctive verbs or verbs that attach (junctive) beneath or with (sub/con) an auxiliary verb.

[Kiliyä]

I see.  You meant the etymology of the term "subjunctive".  As I have learnt in my (small) linguistic studies, etymology =/= meaning!

However, I guess there is a bit of evidence that -iv- does involve (somehow) both the subjunctive and the infinitive moods.  I also guess I'll have to wait for more info!

Irayo.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Srane, I meant the etymological meaning of subjunctive, and its modern/actual usage.

[Tsyaltuan]

Would you use iv in basically any question since it involves an uncertainty?

[omängum fra'uti]

No, because you use other words to indicate the question.  If it's a yes/no, adding "srak" is basically saying "Is what I just said correct?" - so that right there says you don't know.

Ex. ngaru lu fpom srak?

I'd imagine something similar is true for pe+ question words...  When you say, for example, "Who is there?" you're not declaring as a fact that someone specific is there, so there's no implied certainty.

[Tsyaltuan]

So would it ever be used in a question?

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Probably not as a distinct usage.

So it might get used in a sentence like "can you fight" but that is an objective infinitive use not a question use.