Y<awn>e?

[Wähäyu]

I have a small (possibly noob) question (and I know this has been done to death).

Instead of saying "Nga yawne lu oer", could you say "Oel ye ngat"?

I'm probably wrong, but doesn't "yawne" look a lot like a passive participle? I hope I'm not stating the obvious. Of course I understand if "Nga yawne lu oer" is just an idiom , I just wonder if a different emphasis is possible.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

No, it can't be. In na'vi, participles are only ever used attributively, also, if that were the case you'd expect love to be tìye instead of the passive gerund it would be were you correct.

In short, whilst it looks similar it isn't, like tìran being a verb.

[Feiane]

What do you mean by attributively? I don't really understand the error here (besides ye not being a provided word).

ye becoming yawne is a logical possibility.
We don't have a verb for "love" (yet) but if we did, ye would make the most sense wouldn't it?

[omängum fra'uti]

Attributively means with a.  You can say "Yerik atawnaron" for the hunted hexapede, but you'd never say "Yerik lu tawnaron" for "hexapede is hunted" - rather you'd just say "Yerikit fkol taron".

[Feiane]

oooooooh I didn't know that! Thanks 

[kewnya txamew'itan]

What do you mean by attributively?

Where the adjective is used as an attribute of a noun, in na'vi we show this with -a-. It is as opposed to using an adjective predicatively as in "he is blue" or "oe 'ewan lu" where the adjective forms part of the predicate (working a bit like an object of a copula verb) or nominal adjectives as in "I liked the fun play but my teacher preferred the boring". There're also absolute adjectives but I don't entirely understand how they could work in na'vi (if they do at all).

[omängum fra'uti]

The participles can be used ruminatively though...  That gives us a gerund.

[Wähäyu]

Thanks. I admit you're right. I was using it predicatively.
So does this mean that Na'vi doesn't have substantives? I mean it looks to me like the word nìawnomum means comes from nì and <awn>omum, which looks to me very much like a substantive.

But I'm just a beginner, come correct me.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

The participles can be used ruminatively though...  That gives us a gerund.

I'm not sure what ruminative would mean in this context, can you explain please?

Thanks. I admit you're right. I was using it predicatively.
So does this mean that Na'vi doesn't have substantives? I mean it looks to me like the word nìawnomum means comes from nì and <awn>omum, which looks to me very much like a substantive.

But I'm just a beginner, come correct me.

nìawnomum is indeed thought to be nì-<awn>omum.

Substantive adjectives are a possibility, they can certainly be formed with reference to people using -tu, it's possible there's an equivalent affix based on 'u for things associated with an adjective.

[omängum fra'uti]

Thanks. I admit you're right. I was using it predicatively.
So does this mean that Na'vi doesn't have substantives? I mean it looks to me like the word nìawnomum means comes from nì and <awn>omum, which looks to me very much like a substantive.

But I'm just a beginner, come correct me.

That's not using it predictively.  I think rather than saying "it has to be used attributively" it would be more correct to say "As an adjective it has to be used attributively" or "It can't be used predictively".  Other forms, such as nìawnomum or tìawnomum are perfectly acceptable.

Zene oe tìawnomumit rivun
I must find the known

[Tirea Aean]

well you are correct that nìawnomum comes from nì-<awn>omum. "as known" that is a sort of phrase.

[Wähäyu]

Other forms, such as nìawnomum or tìawnomum are perfectly acceptable.

So does this mean that you need a derivative affix in order form a substantive? I dunno if it could still be called one in that case.

well you are correct that nìawnomum comes from nì-<awn>omum. "as known" that is a sort of phrase.

Would "like that which is known" be slightly more accurate?

[Tirea Aean]

Would "like that which is known" be slightly more accurate?

well, nìawnomum LITERALLY means "knownly" which is supposed to have a meaning if you translate the IDEA of nìawnomum into English you get something like our idiom "as we/you know." but it basically means "like that which is known."

[kewnya txamew'itan]

The participles can be used ruminatively though...  That gives us a gerund.

I'm not sure what ruminative would mean in this context, can you explain please?

tsun livu oer tì'eyng ko?

Other forms, such as nìawnomum or tìawnomum are perfectly acceptable.

So does this mean that you need a derivative affix in order form a substantive? I dunno if it could still be called one in that case.

well you are correct that nìawnomum comes from nì-<awn>omum. "as known" that is a sort of phrase.

Would "like that which is known" be slightly more accurate?

1. Probably

2. It's the best translation using 100% rock solid standard English grammar. Knownly is more accurate but doesn't really fit standard English well.