Because of you.

[Ataeghane]

How to translate:
Because of you I will kill myself.

Ta lun ngeyä oe tspäpayang.
Ngata oe tspäpayang.
Ta lun a nga lu oe tspäpayang.
?

[Kamean]

Ngeyä lun new oe tspäpayang. But I'm not sure.

[Ataeghane]

Looks a bit non-gramatical.

[Kemaweyan]

Hmm.. maybe just topic?

  Ngari oe tspäpayang.

[Ataeghane]

Well, in positive meaning I would use even "-fpi". (I will kill myself for you and thus sacrifice.)  But I mean some nagative conotation.

"Ngari oe tspäpayang" looks like "as for you, I will commit suicide". I mean sth like "you are the cause".

What about:
Nga lu oeyk fì'uä a oe tspäpayang.

(Is there any shorter form of "fì'uä a"? "Fwäa"? "Fwä"?)

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

I think your first try was very good. Simple, and to the point:

Ta lun ngeyä oe tspäpayang

But there is a word, talun(a) that combines the meaning of the first two words, and makes the sentence a little neater:

Talun(a) ngeyä oe tspäpayang

The a on talun(a) is optional, and its presence or absence does not change the meaning.

[MIPP]

I would say:

Nga lu oeyk a oe tspäpayang.

You are reason that I kill myself.

But I suppose you could also say:

Ngal tspäpeykayang oeru.

You cause me to kill myself.

As one says: "translate the meaning, not the words!"  Both sentences have the same meaning, but I think the Na'vi people would use the last one.

[Sireayä mokri]

I vote for topic It is definitely the easiest way of saying it. And if you're afraid of ambiguity, the context should make it clear anyway.

[Carborundum]

I agree, topical looks tidiest.

[MIPP]

But the sentence with topical wouldn't mean "As for you, I kill myself"?

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

I would say:

Nga lu oeyk a oe tspäpayang

You are reason that I kill myself.

This works very well. I did a look at that various words we have that could mean 'that', and a is hard to beat here. If you were a little more wishful, you could also write:

Nga lu oeyk tsnì oe new tspäpivang

But I suppose you could also say:

Ngal tspäpeykayang oeru

You cause me to kill myself.

This isn't nearly as clear in meaning, but is kind of cool. It seems that tspang likes to take lots of infixes, kind of like the infamous täpeykìyeverkeiup (I wonder if poe tspäpeykìyevspeiang nìnäk would have worked as well).

[omängum fra'uti]

Alright first let me put on my grammar nazi hat here and clear up some misunderstanding.

First, the combined infix -äpeyk- means cause onself to, not cause someone else to do something to themself.  (Also a minor point, but not sure how or if it works in transitive verbs.)

Second, tsnì is not a general word that can be used in any situation, though we don't know the full rules for where it can and can't be used.  This is most certainly not one of those places.

Lun ngeyä is your reason, so that doesn't seem to fit here.

I'm actually not sure what is correct here, but I would probably look at the derivation of "taluna" and "taweyka"...  Specifically, they are based off of "ta X".  So perhaps something like "ta nga ..." for "because of you".

[MIPP]

Hum... damnit, I loved the sentence with the -äpeyk- infix. 

[Ataeghane]

Oh... I think that's sth we should reconsider, ma first Na'vi grammar nazi.

That problem is: How to say "You will cause me to kill myself".

So, lets start with "You will cause me to kill".

Ngal oeru tspeykayang.

I think that sth everyone can agree on.

Next thing is how add next argument? If that were: "You will cause me to kill him", everything would be clear:

Ngal oer poti tspeykayang.

But what to do we need to repeat pronoun?

Ngal oer oeti tspeykayang seems to be a bit awkward. Using <äp> infix seems to be a good solution...

Ngal oer tspäpeykayang.

...but we don't know which pair is considered to be the same ("-ti & -ru" pair or maybe "-l & -ti"). You will make me kill myself... or yourself?

[omängum fra'uti]

No reconsidering there necessary.  We know that -äpeyk- is cause oneself to, that is from Frommer, so it wouldn't work there.

But...  It just occurred to me there is another adposition to consider...  fa.  Consider "Oel ngati tspang fa po" - I killed you by means of him.  This is basically saying the same thing as "Oel poru ngati tspeykang".  (Remember, there are many ways to say the same thing in languages.)

So "Ngal oeti tspaying fa oe" would be a similar meaning to the original question.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

Alright first let me put on my grammar nazi hat here and clear up some misunderstanding.

First, the combined infix -äpeyk- means cause onself to, not cause someone else to do something to themself.  (Also a minor point, but not sure how or if it works in transitive verbs.)

But isn't 'cause myself to kill myself' precisely what is being meant in 'Because of you I will kill myself'? It is the speaker that is killing themselves. So although it is the other party who is ultimately responsible for what is going on, it is causing the speaker to kill themselves, which is the immediate action.

[omängum fra'uti]

But isn't 'cause myself to kill myself' precisely what is being meant in 'Because of you I will kill myself'? It is the speaker that is killing themselves. So although it is the other party who is ultimately responsible for what is going on, it is causing the speaker to kill themselves, which is the immediate action.

It is, but that is not what I said.

You put it as "(Other party) cause myself to X myself" but as I said, äpeyk is "I cause myself to do X".

Verb = Do something
Verb + eyk = Cause (something) to do something
Verb + eyk + äp = Cause oneself to do something

With äp and eyk together, the äp is making the subject in the clause take both the role of the one doing the action, and the one causing the action to happen.  There is no outside party involved.

[Tswusayona Tsamsiyu]

perhaps we should ask Frommer about that. I think we might need a new form of <0> placed infixes for that. I mean if we had <eykäp> that would solve all problems.

[Kamean]

Yes, eykäp would be the best solution.

[omängum fra'uti]

Frommer has said there will be no more infixes, so don't count on it.  However as I pointed out a few posts ago, it is still possible to say without having to come up with new convoluted infixes.  As it is, äpeyk is confusing enough, *eykäp would just make it worse.