User:Maf654321/Na'vi Language

The Na’vi language is the constructed language of the Na’vi, the sapient humanoid indigenous inhabitants of the fictional moon Pandora in the 2009 film Avatar. It was created by Paul Frommer, a professor at the Marshall School of Business with a doctorate in linguistics. Na’vi was designed to fit James Cameron's conception of what the language should sound like in the film, to be realistically learnable by the fictional human characters of the film, and to be pronounceable by the actors, but to not closely resemble any single human language.

When the film was released in 2009, Na’vi had a growing vocabulary of about a thousand words, but understanding of its grammar was limited to the language's creator.

History
The Na'vi language has its origins in James Cameron's early work on Avatar. In 2005, while the film was still in scriptment form, Cameron felt it needed a complete, consistent language for the alien characters to speak. He had written approximately thirty words for this alien language but wanted a linguist to create the language in full. His production company, Lightstorm Entertainment, contacted the linguistics department at the University of Southern California seeking someone who would be interested in creating such a language. Edward Finegan, a professor of linguistics at USC, thought that the project would appeal to Paul Frommer, with whom he had co-authored a linguistics textbook, and so forwarded Lightstorm's inquiry on to him. Frommer and Cameron met to discuss the director's vision for the language and its use in the film; at the end of the meeting, Cameron shook Frommer's hand and said "Welcome aboard."

Based on Cameron's initial list of words, which had a "Polynesian flavor" according to Frommer, the linguist developed three different sets of meaningless words and phrases that conveyed a sense of what an alien language might sound like: one using contrasting tones, one using varying vowel lengths, and one using ejective consonants. Of the three, Cameron liked the sound of the ejectives best. His choice established the phonology that Frommer would use in developing the rest of the Na'vi language - morphology, syntax, and an initial vocabulary - a task that took six months.

The Na'vi language was developed under three significant constraints. First, Cameron wanted the language to sound alien but pleasant and appealing to audiences. Second, since the storyline included humans who have learned to speak the language, it had to be a language that humans could plausibly learn to speak. And finally, the actors would have to be able to pronounce their Na'vi dialogue without unreasonable difficulty. The language in its final form contains several elements which are uncommon in human languages, such as verbal conjugation using infixes. All Na'vi linguistic elements are found in human languages, but the combination is unique.

The Na'vi vocabulary was created by Frommer as needed for the script. By the time casting for Avatar began, the language was sufficiently developed that actors were required to read and pronounce Na'vi dialogue during auditions. During shooting Frommer worked with the cast, helping them understand their Na'vi dialog and advising them on their Na'vi pronunciation, stress, and intonation. Actors would occasionally make mistakes in speaking Na'vi. In some cases, those mistakes were plausibly explained as ones their human characters would make; in other cases, the mistakes were incorporated into the language.

Frommer expanded the vocabulary further in May 2009 when he worked on the Avatar video game, which required Na'vi words that had not been needed for the film script and thus had not yet been invented. Frommer also translated into Na'vi four sets of song lyrics that had been written by Cameron in English, and he helped vocalists with their pronunciation during the recording of James Horner's Avatar score. At the time of the film's release on December 18, 2009, the Na'vi vocabulary consisted of approximately 1000 words.

Work on the Na'vi language has continued even after the film's release. Frommer is working on a compendium which he plans to deliver to Fox in the near future. He hopes that the language will "have a life of its own," and thinks it would be "wonderful" if the language developed a following.

Phonology and orthography
Na’vi lacks voiced stops like, but has the ejective stops , spelled px, tx, kx, and the voiced fricatives. It also has the syllabic consonants ll and rr and seven simple vowels. Although all the sounds were designed to be pronounceable by the human actors of the film, there are unusual consonant clusters, as in fngap "metal" and tskxe  "rock".

The fictional language Na’vi of Pandora is unwritten. However, the actual (studio) language was written in the Latin alphabet for the actors of Avatar. The movie scripts were written in a slightly anglicized orthography, with ng, ts for Frommer's preferred g, c. Sample words: zìsìt "year", fpeio "ceremonial challenge", nìawve "first" (aw "one"), muiä "be fair", tiréaióang "spirit animal", kllpxìltu "territory", uniltìrantokx "avatar".

Vowels
Na’vi has thirteen vowel-like sounds. There are seven simple vowels: as well as four diphthongs: aw, ew , ay , ey , and two syllabic consonants: ll and rr , which mostly behave as vowels.

Most of these occur in English. The vowels ä a e ì i ey ay are pronounced as General American and RP bat, baa, bet, bit, marine, obey, kayak, and aw more or less as in cow. The u varies between put and flute. The o and ew sounds do not occur in these dialects. O is the pure vowel of Scottish and Irish no or Australian and South African bought, like Spanish o or, even closer, French eau and Italian come. The ew is equivalent to the eu in Spanish Europa and the el in Brazilian mel "honey". An English approximation is "oh!" in exaggerations of the Queen's English by American comedians such as Carol Burnett. The syllabic consonants behave as vowels, as in plltxe "to speak" and prrte’  "pleasure". The rr is strongly trilled, like Spanish rr, but forming a syllable of its own, like an imitation of a cat's purr. The ll is similar to the syllabic le of bottle, but is "light", as in leap or as in Irish English, not "dark" as GA and RP syllabic l is.

Na’vi vowels may occur in sequences, as in the Polynesian languages, Bantu, and Japanese. Each vowel counts as a syllable, so that tsaleioae has six syllables,, and meoauniaea has eight,. The syllabic consonants may also occur in sequence with a simple vowel or diphthong, as in hrrap "dangerous" or kxeill  "to charge (positive speaker attitude)".

Stress
Na’vi does not have vowel length or tone, but it does have contrastive stress: túte "person", tuté  "female person". Although stress may move with derivation, as here, it is not affected by inflection (case on nouns, tense on verbs, etc). So, for example, the verb lu "to be" has stress on its only vowel, the u, and no matter what else happens to it, the stress stays on that vowel: lolú "was" (l‹ol›u), lolängú   "was (negative speaker attitude)" (l‹ol›‹äng›u), etc. Although case may affect the pronouns based on oe "I", most affixes do not affect the stress of nouns or pronouns. For example, from nga "you", there is nìayngá "like you all" (nì-ay-nga); from lì’u  "word" there is aylì’ufa  "with the words".

Consonants
There are twenty consonants. There are two Latin transcriptions: one that more closely approaches the ideal of one letter per phoneme, with the letters c and g for and  (the values they have in much of Eastern Europe and Polynesia, respectively), and a modified transcription used for the actors, with the digraphs ts and ng used for those sounds. In both transcriptions, the ejective consonants are written with digraphs in x, a convention that appears to be unique to Na’vi, though Nambikwara uses tx, kx for similar glottalized consonants.

The plosives p t k and the affricate ts are tenuis, as in Spanish or French. In final position, they are unreleased, as in Malay and other languages of Southeast Asia. The r is flapped, as in Spanish and Malay; it sounds a bit like the tt or dd in the American pronunciation of the words latter / ladder.

The combination of ejective plosives and voiced fricatives, but no voiced or aspirated plosives, is unusual in human language, but does occur in the Kamchatkan language Itelmen.

Syllable structure
Na’vi syllables may be as simple as a single vowel, or as complex as skxawng "moron" or fngap "metal", both CCVC.

The fricatives and the affricate, f v ts s z h, are restricted to the onset of a syllable; the other consonants may occur at either the beginning or at the end (though w y in final position are considered parts of a diphthong, as they only occur as ay ey aw ew and may be followed by another final consonant, as in skxawng "moron"). However, in addition to appearing before vowels, f ts s may form consonant clusters with any of the unrestricted consonants (the stops and liquids/glides) apart from ’, making for 39 possible clusters at the beginning of a syllable. Other sequences occur across syllable boundaries, such as na’vi "person", ikran  "banshee", and atxkxe  "land".

However, not all vowels are created equal. The seven simple vowels and the diphthongs occur in any type of syllable, but the syllabic consonants only occur in open syllables. So far, only CV and V are attested as a syllable when V is rr or ll, as in vrrtep (vrr-tep) "demon". In addition, two identical simple vowels may not occur in a row, and diphthongs before another vowel are not distinguished from a consonant y or w between vowels. That is, *me-e-vi is not found, and there is no distinction between ay-a and a-ya in Na’vi. Nouns ending in a diphthong or syllabic consonant also take the case endings used after consonants, not those used after the seven simple vowels.

Sound change
The most notable form of sound change in Na’vi is a kind of consonant mutation called lenition. This is a weakening that the plosive consonants undergo after certain prefixes and prepositions. In this environment, the ejective plosives px tx kx become the corresponding plain plosives p t k; the plain plosives and affricate p t ts k become the corresponding fricatives f s h; and the glottal stop ’ disappears entirely. Τhis is basically equivalent to dropping a row in the consonant chart above.

Because of lenition, the singular and plural forms of nouns can appear rather different. For example, the plural form of po "s/he" is ayfo "they", with the p weakening into an f after the plural prefix ay-, and after the preposition ftu "from", tsa "that" takes the (accusative) form sat. Other examples of lenition can be seen in the interrogative chart below.

The nasal consonants m, n, ng tend to assimilate to a following nasal, so that tìng mikyun "to listen" (lit. "give an ear") is usually pronounced as if it were tìm mikyun, and tìng nari "to look" (lit. "give an eye") is usually pronounced tìn nari.

Vowel sequences consist of dissimilar vowels only. Na’vi does not have vowel length, and this means that derived sequences of similar vowels contract into one. For example, when feminine -é is added to túte "person", the result contracts to tuté "female person", with the only difference being stress placement. Similarly, the dual number me- of eltu "brain" contracts to meltu "two brains". However, when two i's come together in the approbative inflection of si "to do" in ngaru irayo s‹ei›i oe "I thank you )", a y is inserted to separate them: Ngáru iráyo seiyí oe.

With the informal pronoun oe "I" and its derivatives, the o reduces to a sound whenever the stress shifts to the e : Óel  "I", but oéru  "to me" and ayoéng  "all of us".

There are other instances of sound change to avoid sequences that don't occur in Na’vi, though the details are not known. For example, the syllabic consonants cannot follow their non-syllabic homologs; though occurs in lrrtok "a smile", lll and rrr are not found. Thus the perfective infix ‹ol› affects plltxe "to say, to speak": p‹ol›lltxe → poltxe "spoke".

The vowels of short grammatical words are sometimes elided before a lexical word or phrase that begins with a vowel, at least in song, for instance sì "and" in s-ayzìsìtä kato "and the rhythm of the years" and lu "to be" in a l-ayngakip "who is among you"; the same may happen of unstressed vowels of grammatical prefixes, as the ì of nì-’aw "only" in han’aw txo "so (ha) only (nì’aw) if (txo)". These examples fit the meter of a song, but similar things occur in fluent speech, for example rä’si! for rä’ä si! "don't do it!".

Grammar
Accounts of the grammar cover parts of speech, their uses, and some of their inflections, but not much about the syntax.

Pronouns
Na’vi pronouns encode clusivity. That is, there are different words for "we" depending on whether the speaker is including the person spoken to or not. There are also special forms for "the two of us" (oeng "you & me", moe "s/he & me"), "the three of us", etc. Pronouns do not inflect for gender; although it's possible to distinguish "he" from "she", the distinction is optional.

Oeng is a contraction of oe-nga, which form it reverts to when inflected: ergative oéngal, etc. (See Case below.) Ayoeng and awnga are both contractions of plural *ayoenga; the latter tends to be shorter when inflected: ergative ayoengal vs. awngal.

The formal forms of "I" and "you" are óhe and ngengá, which likewise take the me- and ay- prefixes. The inclusive forms are derived from these with the word sì "and":

Possessive forms include oéyä "my", ngéyä "your", ohengeyä "our" (formal dual inclusive; note that the sì is lost with inflection), péyä "her/his". "He" and "she" can optionally be differentiated as poan and poé; this may be done to distinguish two referents in the same context, as normally both are translated as simply po. Fo is the "short plural" form of po; ayfo is the explicit plural.

"One" as a pronoun is fko:




 * Zéne||fko||n‹iv›úme||''nì-txán
 * must||one||learn‹subjunctive›||adverb-much
 * }
 * "There is much to learn" (lit. "One must learn much")
 * "There is much to learn" (lit. "One must learn much")

Pronouns are declined for case as nouns (below) are:


 * Oel ngáti kámeie


 * Oe-l||nga-ti||kam‹ei›e
 * I-ergative case || you-accusative case || See‹approbative›
 * }
 * "I (am glad to) See you" (a greeting)
 * }
 * "I (am glad to) See you" (a greeting)

Nouns
Na’vi noun phrases are inflected according to the following template, not including attributives (adjectives etc.):

grammatical number+word stem-(grammatical gender)-grammatical case

There are no articles like "a" or "the".

Number
In Na’vi, plurals are only used if there are at least four objects.



!align=left colspan=2|Number!!align=left|Prefix
 * 1||Singular || (none)
 * 2||Dual || me+
 * 3||Trial || pxe+
 * 4+ ||"Plural" || ay+ or + (ay- plus lenition, or just lenition)
 * }
 * 3||Trial || pxe+
 * 4+ ||"Plural" || ay+ or + (ay- plus lenition, or just lenition)
 * }
 * }
 * }

Nouns show greater number distinctions than human languages do: besides singular and plural, they not only have special dual forms for two of an item (eyes, hands, lovers, etc.), which are not uncommon in human language (English has a remnant in "both"), but also trial forms for three of an item, which in human languages are only found with pronouns. A plural is more than dual or trial; that is, four or more. For example, in "the wings of a banshee", tsyal "wing" is plural (ikranä syal), because banshees (ikran) have four wings, but in "the eyes of a banshee" nari "eye" cannot be plural, but only dual (ikranä menari), because banshees have only two eyes.

The prefixes trigger lenition, which is indicated in the table above by the "+" signs rather than the hyphens that usually mark prefix boundaries. Trials are not common, but occur for example in pxehilvan "the three rivers" (kilvan "river"). In nouns which undergo lenition, the plural prefix may be dropped, so the plural of tokx "body" may be either aysokx (the "full plural") or sokx (the "short plural"). In the dual and trial, lenition of a glottal stop may result in a sequence of two e's, in which case they contract: ’eveng "a child", pxeveng "three children".

Gender
Na’vi does not have grammatical gender. However, masculine individuals may be distinguished by the suffix -an, and feminine ones by -e :


 * Masculine || -an
 * Feminine || -e
 * }
 * Feminine || -e
 * }
 * }

For example, tsmuk or tsmúktu is "sibling", tsmukán "brother", and tsmuké "sister".

However, gender is not generally used unless there is some reason for distinguishing it.

Case
Many of the case markers have several allomorphs, the distribution of which is not entirely known:




 * Intransitive || (unmarked)
 * Ergative || -ìl, -l
 * Accusative || -it, -t, -ti
 * Genitive || -ä, -yä, -eyä
 * Dative || -ru, -ur, -r
 * Topic/regarding || -ìri, -ri
 * }
 * Genitive || -ä, -yä, -eyä
 * Dative || -ru, -ur, -r
 * Topic/regarding || -ìri, -ri
 * }
 * Topic/regarding || -ìri, -ri
 * }
 * }

Nouns are not double-marked for case. Attributives do not agree, in case or number, with the nouns they modify, and this holds for possessive pronouns and genitive nouns as much as it does for adjectives. So while "my spear" in citation form is oeyä tukru, in the ergative case it is oeyä tukrul, with only tukrul "spear" marked for the ergative.

Subject and object
Nouns are declined for case in a tripartite system, which is quite rare among human languages, though found in Nez Perce. In a tripartite system, there are distinct forms for the object of a clause, as in "Neytiri hunted a hexapede "; the agent of a transitive clause which has such an object, as in " Neytiri hunted a hexapede"; and the argument ("subject") of an intransitive clause, which does not have an object, as in " Neytiri is sleeping". An object is marked with the accusative suffix -it/-t/-ti, and an agent with the ergative suffix -ìl/-l, while an intransitive argument has no case suffix. That is, the ergative and accusative tend to occur as a pair, whereas a single argument has no case inflection. Translating our English examples:


 * ||"Neytiri hunted a hexapede"

Neytiril yerikit tolaron


 * Neytiri-l||yerik-it||t‹ol›aron
 * (name)-ergative case || hexapede-accusative case || hunt‹perfective›
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }

The use of such case forms leaves the word order of Na’vi largely free, for example, agent-object-verb (AOV) or object-verb-agent (OVA):


 * ||Katot täftxu oel

"I weave the rhythm"


 * kato-t||täftxu||oe-l
 * rhythm- (O) || weave (V) || I- (A)
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }

When evident from context, the subject need not be stated:

"Oe trram na’rìng-mì tarmok. Tsole’a syetute-t.

"Yesterday I was in the forest, saw a Trapper".


 * Oe||trram||na’rìng-mì||tarmok||tsole’a||syetute-t
 * I.||yesterday||forest-in||was||saw||Trapper-
 * }
 * I.||yesterday||forest-in||was||saw||Trapper-
 * }

The genitive
A genitive case in -ä/-yä can be seen in oeyä tukru "my spear" above. English expresses the genitive with either -’s (the pianist’s hands) or with of (the hands of the clock). Unlike the other cases, the genitive shows the relationship of nouns to each other, rather than between a noun and a verb. Although sometimes called a "possessive", the genitive has a broader range of use than actual possession.

Genitives may be sequenced, as in


 * Aylì’ufa awngeyä ’eylanä a’ewan
 * "In the words of our young friend"


 * ay-lì’-’u-fa||awng[e]-yä||’eylan-ä||a-’ewan
 * pl-say-thing-per||our-genitive case||friend-||-young
 * }
 * }

The dative
The dative is prototypically used for giving something to someone, marking a recipient, or doing something for someone, marking a benefactor:

Nga Na’viru yomtìyìng

"You will feed the people"


 * nga||na’vi-ru||yom+t‹ìy›ìng
 * you. || the.people-dative case || will.feed (to.eat+give‹›)
 * }
 * you. || the.people-dative case || will.feed (to.eat+give‹›)
 * }

More generally, it is used for the direction or end point of an action, as in poru tìng-nari "look at him". However, it is also used in situations, so-called dative constructions, where an English speaker might not expect it:


 * ||Ngaru lu fpom srak?

"Hello, how are you?"

Such constructions contain verbs such as lu "be" that involve little overt action, including more concrete concepts of having. When one has something for someone, a double dative is used:
 * nga-ru||lu||fpom||srak?
 * You- || be || well.being || question marker
 * }
 * -align=right
 * (Literally, "May there be forgiveness for me" = "May I have forgiveness")
 * ||(Literally, "Is there well-being for you?" = "Do you have well-being?")
 * }
 * ||(Literally, "Is there well-being for you?" = "Do you have well-being?")
 * }


 * Lu oeru aylì’u frapor.
 * "I have something (= words) to say, to everyone."


 * lu||oe-ru||ay-lì’u||fra-po-r
 * be||I-||pl-word||every-one-
 * }
 * be||I-||pl-word||every-one-
 * }

The topic and the topical case
A topic indicates the background context of a clause, and the topic marker -ri/-ìri is somewhat equivalent to (though much more common than) English "as for", "concerning", "regarding", etc. Topics are not grammatically required, but are used to structure the presentation of what one has to say. The topic marker preempts the case of the noun: that is, when a noun is made topical, it takes the -ri/-ìri suffix rather than the case suffix one would expect from its grammatical role. For example, in,


 * Oeri ontu teya längu


 * Oe-ri||ontu||teya||l‹äng›u
 * I-topic marker||nose||full||be‹Pejorative›
 * }
 * "My nose is full [of his distasteful smell]",
 * }
 * "My nose is full [of his distasteful smell]",

since the topic is "I", the subject "nose" is associated with "me": That is, it's understood to be "my nose" without stating that explicitly. Note that "nose" itself is unmarked for case, as it's the subject of the intransitive verb "to be".

Such a topic-comment structure sets up the background of the sentence, what the speaker intends to speak about with the rest. (Thus the term 'topic-comment': what the speaker intends to talk about, followed by what s/he has to say about it.) This construction takes some of the pressure off of the case system, with the result that not too many nouns need to be marked with the same case:


 * Sìpawmìri oe ngaru seiyi irayo


 * sì-pawm-ìri||oe||nga-ru||s‹ei›i||irayo
 * pl+nominalizer-ask-topic marker||I||you-dative case||do‹approbative›||thank
 * }
 * "Thank you for the questions" (lit. "As for the questions, I thank you")
 * }
 * "Thank you for the questions" (lit. "As for the questions, I thank you")

This -ri/-ìri can also behave as a more typical case, linking the noun phrase to the verb, rather than setting up a topic as an introduction for the rest of clause to comment on:
 * Pxan livu txo nì’aw oe ngari


 * pxan||l‹iv›u||txo||nì-’aw||oe||nga-ri
 * worthy||be‹subjunctive›||if||adverb-one||I||you-topic marker
 * }
 * "Only if I am worthy of you" (lit. "Only if I be worthy in regard to you")
 * }
 * "Only if I am worthy of you" (lit. "Only if I be worthy in regard to you")


 * Ngaru seiyi oe irayo ngeyä pxesìpawmìri


 * nga-ru||s‹ei›i||oe||irayo||ng[e]-yä||pxe+tì-pawm-ìri
 * you-||do‹›||I||thank||you-||+-question-
 * }
 * "I thank you for (in regards to) your three questions"
 * "I thank you for (in regards to) your three questions"

Case allomorphs
Case suffixes have distinct forms depending on whether the noun ends in a consonant or in a vowel, with a vowel-initial form for consonant-final nouns, and a consonant-initial form for vowel-final nouns, so that adding case endings does not result in consonant or vowel clusters. (The -ti form of the accusative is the one invariant exception; see below.) Syllabic consonants ll, rr and the w-, y-ending diphthongs count as consonants in this regard, as they all take the vowel-initial allomorphs of the case suffixes.

An invariant form of the accusative, -ti, is attested on both pronouns and on nouns. For instance, a quick response to the greeting oel ngati kameie "I See you", with the long form of the accusative, is kame ngat, with the short form. Thus the difference would appear to be one of register rather than of grammar.

The dative also has a long and short form, for instance "to me" may be either oeru or oer, but it is not known whether this also occurs on nouns.

In addition, there may be changes in the noun or pronoun itself when case endings are added. For example, the inclusive pronouns based on oeng revert to their historical form *oe-nga when inflected, so that the ergative is oengal, not xoengìl. Changes in the noun stem sometimes occur with the genitive as well; this can be seen in the pronouns, where the final vowel becomes e before the genitive -yä : oeyä, awngeyä, ngeyä, peyä, etc.


 * {| class=wikitable

! !! !! !!short !!long !! !!short !!long  !! trrä, kifkeyä || tsahìku ? ||’eylanur ||skxawngìri
 * pronoun.||oe||oel|| ?||oeti ||oeyä||oer|| oeru||oeri
 * pronoun.||oeng|| oengal || oengat || oengati || oengeyä? || awngar|| awngaru || ?
 * pronoun.2||nga||ngal||ngat||ngati||ngeyä||ngar|| ngaru|| ngari
 * pronoun.3||po|| pol ||pot||?||peyä|| por|| poru || fì’uri
 * N ending in V|| — ||tukrul ||katot||swiräti||tompayä||?||na’viru|| fyawìntxuri
 * N ending in C|| — || tìngayìl||ye’rikit txe’lanit||ketuwongti Kelutralti || txonä, zìsìtä,
 * pronoun.3||po|| pol ||pot||?||peyä|| por|| poru || fì’uri
 * N ending in V|| — ||tukrul ||katot||swiräti||tompayä||?||na’viru|| fyawìntxuri
 * N ending in C|| — || tìngayìl||ye’rikit txe’lanit||ketuwongti Kelutralti || txonä, zìsìtä,
 * N ending in V|| — ||tukrul ||katot||swiräti||tompayä||?||na’viru|| fyawìntxuri
 * N ending in C|| — || tìngayìl||ye’rikit txe’lanit||ketuwongti Kelutralti || txonä, zìsìtä,
 * N ending in C|| — || tìngayìl||ye’rikit txe’lanit||ketuwongti Kelutralti || txonä, zìsìtä,
 * }

Adpositions
Besides case, the role of a noun in a clause may be indicated with an adposition. This may occur either as a preposition before the noun, or as an enclitic after the noun, a greater degree of freedom than human languages allow. For example, "with you" may be either hu nga or ngahu. When used as enclitics, they are much like the numerous cases found in Hungarian and Finnish. When used as prepositions, more along the lines of what English does, certain of them trigger lenition. One of the leniting prepositions is mì "in", as in mì sokx "in the body". This may cause some ambiguity with short plurals: mì sokx could also be short for mì aysokx "in the bodies". When mì is used as an enclitic, however, the noun is not lenited: tokxmì "in the body", sokxmì "in the bodies".

Attested adpositions:




 * äo || "under" || äo Vitrautral || under the Tree of Souls
 * (’)em || "over, above"
 * eo || "before, in front of" || eo ayoeng || before us
 * (’)ìm || "behind, in back"
 * fa || "per" (with, by means of)
 * fpi || "for the sake of"
 * ftu || "from" (direction) || ftu sat || from that (lenition)
 * hu || "with, together with" (accompaniment) || Eywa ngahu ||Gaia (be) with you
 * ìlä || "via, along, by"
 * ka || "across"
 * kip || "among" || ayngakip ||among you
 * mì || "in" || mì te’lan || in the heart (lenition)
 * ne || "to" (direction) || Terìran ayoe ayngane ||we are walking your way
 * ta || "from" (generic) || aungia ta Eywa || a sign from Eywa
 * teri || "about, concerning" || (stress on the i, no lenition)
 * vay || "up to" (space or time) || vay set ||up to now, still, (with a negative verb) not yet (no lenition)
 * }
 * ka || "across"
 * kip || "among" || ayngakip ||among you
 * mì || "in" || mì te’lan || in the heart (lenition)
 * ne || "to" (direction) || Terìran ayoe ayngane ||we are walking your way
 * ta || "from" (generic) || aungia ta Eywa || a sign from Eywa
 * teri || "about, concerning" || (stress on the i, no lenition)
 * vay || "up to" (space or time) || vay set ||up to now, still, (with a negative verb) not yet (no lenition)
 * }
 * ta || "from" (generic) || aungia ta Eywa || a sign from Eywa
 * teri || "about, concerning" || (stress on the i, no lenition)
 * vay || "up to" (space or time) || vay set ||up to now, still, (with a negative verb) not yet (no lenition)
 * }
 * vay || "up to" (space or time) || vay set ||up to now, still, (with a negative verb) not yet (no lenition)
 * }
 * }

These may be combined for more specific location: ne’ìm "toward the back"; ta’em "from above". Note also neto "away (toward the distance)" and mìso "away (in the distance)", both perhaps based on the particle to "than".

Adjectives and other attributives
Na’vi adjectives may occur either before or after the noun they modify. They are marked by a particle a, which is attached on the side closest to the noun, another feature that is unusual by the standards of human languages. For example, "a long river" can be expressed either as ngima kilvan,




 * ngim-a||kilvan
 * long-attributive||river
 * }
 * long-attributive||river
 * }

or as kilvan angim,




 * kilvan||a-ngim
 * river||attributive-long
 * }
 * river||attributive-long
 * }

When more than one adjective modifies a noun, they may appear on either side, as in,




 * oeyä||eana||txìm||atsawl
 * my||blue||butt||big
 * }
 * "my big blue butt"
 * }
 * "my big blue butt"

The a affix is optional for derived le- adjectives after a noun: trr lefpom or optionally trr alefpom "a peaceful day", but lefpoma trr.

The attributive affix a- is only used when an adjective modifies a noun. Predicative adjectives instead take the "be" verb lu:




 * kilvan||ngim||lu
 * river||long||be
 * }
 * (also kilvan lu ngim etc.) "The river is long"
 * }
 * (also kilvan lu ngim etc.) "The river is long"

Adjectives are uninflected. That is, they do not agree with the noun they modify, as in Sì ’ekong te’lanä le-Na’vi "and the beat of the hearts of the People", where only the noun te’lan "hearts", not the adjective le-Na’vi "Na’vi", takes the genitive suffix -ä.

The syntactically free (discourse-determined) word order of adjectives in a noun phrase holds for all attributives: Genitives (possessives) and relative clauses can also either precede or follow the noun they modify. The latter is marked by a particle a.


 * Genitives (possessives) in -yä
 * tompayä kato "the rhythm (kato) of the rain (tompa)"
 * Utral Aymokriyä "the Tree (utral) of Voices (aymokri)"

Ftxey ’awpot a Na’viru yomtìyìng "Choose one (’awpo) who will feed the People (Na’vi)"
 * Relative clauses

Numbers
As the Na’vi have four digits per hand, they have a base-eight number system. Until recently, they only counted up to vofu 14, any number greater than that being pxay "many".



The second series above continues with mevoláw, mevomún, etc. Thus all numbers up to at least kivohín "sixty-three" (octal 77) are single words. Numbers between zam and mezam (one-hundred twenty-eight, octal 200) are not attested. The 'hundreds' continue with pxezam etc. Higher orders are vozam 512 (octal 1000: then mevozam for octal 2000 etc.) and zazam 4096 (octal 10,000: mezazam octal 20,000 etc.).
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }

Numerals form various derivatives, such as ’awpo "one" (an individual), (nì)’awve "first", ’awsiténg "together" (one-make-same), kawtu "no-one" (negative k-), kawkrr "never" (not-one-time), nì’aw "only", and nì’awtu "alone" from "one"; also nìmun "again" and perhaps muntxa "to mate" from mun- "two".

When a numeral is used with a noun, the singular form is used. However, the numerals themselves require the attributive affix a: zìsìt amrr "five years", ’awa tìpawmìri "regarding one (particular) question".

Particles
Various particles in Na’vi are used for negation, addressing people, expressing emotion, and organizing a conversation. For example, tut is a particle of continuation; if someone asks for your name, or how you are, after answering you can say nga(ru) tut? "and you?"

The vocative
The vocative particle ma occurs before a term of address when addressing someone: Ma Neytiri, herahaw srak? "Neytiri, are you sleeping?", rather like archaic or poetic "O!" in English. It occurs before the noun phrase: Ma oeyä ’eylan! "My friend!" No suffixed form is attested.

Ma is used with people, and ceremonially with animals one has killed in a hunt, but not when talking to one's pa’li (horse). It may thus indicate a degree of politeness vs. intimacy.

The negative
The negating particle ke is used together with other negative words. That is, Na’vi utilizes double negatives:




 * fì-ketuwong||ke||n‹ay›ume||''ke-’u
 * this-alien||not||learn‹future tense›||no-thing
 * }
 * "This alien will learn nothing."
 * "This alien will learn nothing."

A longer form, kehe, is used when answering "no" rather than negating a verb.

Ke "not" is only attested before the word it negates, though the adjectival forms may occur before or after a noun: kea N, N ake "no N".

Emotive particles
There are also emotive particles or interjections attested at the ends of phrases and clauses, such as disparaging pak, as in Tsamsiyu pak? "Hah! A warrior! (you call that a warrior?)", surprise nang "oh my!", as in sevin nìtxan nang! "my aren't you pretty!", and a particle ko which elicits agreement like the eh of Canadian English. In other dialects, it can be translated "let's", "okay?", "why don't you", "wouldn't you agree?", etc., as in makto ko! "Let's ride!" and


 * Tsun tutet tspivang ko


 * tsun||tute-t||tsp‹iv›ang||ko
 * be.able||person-||kill‹›||eh
 * }
 * "They can kill a person, you know."
 * "They can kill a person, you know."

Verbs
Verbs are conjugated for tense but not for person. That is, they record distinctions like "I am, I was, I would", but not like "I am, we are, s/he is". Conjugation relies exclusively on infixes, which are like suffixes but go inside the verb. "To hunt", for example, is taron, but "hunted" is tolaron, with the infix ‹ol›.

There are two positions for infixes: after the onset of the penultimate syllable, and after the onset of the final syllable. Because many Na’vi verbs have just two syllables, infixes commonly occur in the first syllable, as in the examples below. In monosyllabic words like lu "be" and tsun "can", moreover, all infixes appear after the initial consonant, but keeping their relative order, as in tsolängun [ts‹ol›‹äng›un] "was able to (ugh!)". If an infix appears in the first or only syllable of a verb, and there is no initial consonant, the infix comes first:




 * tsam-pongu-t||Tsu’tey-l||‹iv›eyk
 * war-party-||(name)-||lead‹›
 * }
 * "Tsu’tey will lead the war party."
 * "Tsu’tey will lead the war party."

In first position, more than one infix can occur. When both convey temporal information (see below), they fuse together; however, when one has a more concrete function, such as a reflexive (acting on oneself), then it precedes the temporal infix(es). Labeling these positions 1a, 1b, and 2, we find the following patterns, depending on the number and kinds of syllables in a word:

Participles and reflexives
The "pre-first" infix position is taken by infixes for non-temporal distinctions such as participles and reflexives.

The participial infix us is found in forms such as kérusey "dead", from ke "not" and rey "to live" (that is, "not-living"), and txantslusam "wise", from txan "much" and tslam "to understand" (that is, "much-understanding").

A reflexive indicates that the subject performs the action on his or her self. For example, oe yur is "I wash (something)", and oel yur kì’ongit "I wash the (sp.) fruit", wheras "I wash myself" is oe yäpur (y‹äp›ur), not *oel yur oeti.

Tense, aspect, mood
Following this, but still in the penultimate syllable, are infixes for tense, aspect, and mood. These follow the first-position infixes when these co-occur, but all appear in the penultimate syllable of the verb stem.

These appear after the previous set of infixes. So "they will wash themselves" is fo yäpayur (y‹äp›‹ay›ur).

Tense
Tense is the easiest of these concepts for an English speaker. However, whereas English has three tenses, past present and future, Na’vi has five, with the addition of a recent past ("just did") and an immediate future ("about to do"):


 * taron [hunt] "hunts"
 * t‹am›aron [hunt‹›] "hunted"
 * t‹ìm›aron [hunt‹›] "just hunted"
 * t‹ay›aron [hunt‹›] "will hunt"
 * t‹ìy›aron [hunt‹›] "is about to hunt"

Na’vi past and future are used for general statements about events in the past or future, as in English; they are not necessarily remote in time. There is no absolute timeframe involved; whether something is considered recent or immediate depends on the judgement of the speaker. An example of the immediate future ìy is nì-Ìnglìsì p‹ìy›lltxe oe "I'll speak in English now", at which point the speaker switches to English. That is, by uttering those words, the speaker anticipates that the switch will take place right away.

More than one tense may be used in a verb:


 * Oe-l||po-t||tsp‹ìm›‹ìy›ang
 * I-|| s/he- ||kill‹›‹›
 * }
 * "I was just about to kill him"
 * "I was just about to kill him"

Aspect
Aspect is a more difficult concept. There are two in Na’vi, a perfective, used when one views the action as contained, as if one were on the outside of the action looking in; and an imperfective, used when one views the action as ongoing or uncontained, as if one were inside with the action.


 * taron [hunt] "hunts"
 * t‹er›aron [hunt‹›] "hunts, (is) hunting"
 * t‹ol›aron [hunt‹›] "hunts, (has) hunted"

This distinction is not found in English but is somewhat like the distinction between (in the past tense) 'having done' and 'was doing' or 'used to do'. However, in Na’vi, either aspect may take place in the past, present, or future. An example of the perfective is tsl‹ol›am "got it" or "understood", from tslam "to understand"—the (unmarked) tense is either present tense or irrelevant; the point being communicated is that the understanding is complete. An example of the imperfective is t‹er›ìran ayoe ayngane "we are walking your way"; here the action is in process. Although the English translation suggests present tense, the Na’vi could actually be past or future.

Aspect may be combined with the tense infixes. Only the imperfective past tenses are attested:
 * t‹ì‹r›m›aron [hunt‹‹››] "was just hunting"
 * t‹a‹r›m›aron [hunt‹‹››] "was hunting"

Tense and aspect need not be marked when they can be understood by context or are established elsewhere in the sentence. For example, in


 * Oe-hu||Txewì||trr-am||na’rìng-mì||t‹a‹r›m›ok.||Ts‹ol›e’a ...
 * I-with||(name)||day-?||forest-in||exist‹‹››||see‹›
 * }
 * "Yesterday I was with Txewì in the forest, (and we) saw ...",
 * "Yesterday I was with Txewì in the forest, (and we) saw ...",

the first clause sets up the context of the past tense, so the verb 'saw' can be marked as simply perfective, not as past perfective.

Mood
There are three attested moods in Na’vi: an unmarked mood used when making an ordinary assertion, an imperative mood used for making commands, and a subjunctive/optative used when one is stating something that is not certain. The imperative, as in English, has no affix: Kä! "go!" (This will be covered in a separate section below.) The subjunctive is little used in English, but is found in a few set expressions such as "if I were you" (not *am you), "God bless you" (not *blesses), "I move that the meeting be adjourned" (not *is adjourned), etc. The Na’vi subjunctive is formed with the infix iv, but is much more common than in English, used whenever one wishes, fears, or suspects that something might or must be so. It is found for example in
 * Oeri tìngayìl txe’lanit tivakuk


 * oe-ri||tì-ngay-ìl||txe’lan-it||t‹iv›akuk
 * I-||nominalizer-true-||heart-||strike‹›
 * }
 * "Let the truth strike my heart" or "that the truth may strike my heart."
 * }
 * "Let the truth strike my heart" or "that the truth may strike my heart."

The subjunctive (optative) is also used to request that someone do or be allowed to do something, by expressing one's wish that they do it, as in,


 * Tivìran po ayoekip


 * t‹iv›ìran||po||''ay-oe-kip
 * walk‹›||s/he||pl-I-among
 * }
 * "Let her walk among us[],"
 * "Let her walk among us[],"

and it is used to give permission, for instance in responding with p‹iv›lltxe "speak!" ("may you speak!") when someone announces they have something to say, or sp‹iv›aw oeti rutxe "please believe me".

The subjunctive is also used after modal verbs of obligation, ability, or desire, such as zene "must", tsun "can", and new "want". (See modal verbs below.)

Other
Other temporal and aspectual forms include tovaron, tevaron, telaron, tairon. Their meaning is not known.

Fused infixes
When tense, aspect, and mood infixes occur together, they fuse: The consonant of the aspect infixes within the tense, as recent past-imperfective ‹ìrm› in tìrmaron "(I) was just hunting", from ‹ì‹er›m›; or the consonant of the tense or aspect infixes within the subjunctive mood.

The table at left lays out the aspect-tense combinations in the indicative (unmarked) mood; the one at right lays out the same combinations in the subjunctive mood.

The expected future subjunctive *iyv, however, is a problem, as *iy is not a possible syllable coda in Na’vi. This is solved by inserting an epenthetic vowel e: ‹iyev›; moreover, in the common expression kìyevame "see (you) soon", there is a degree of vowel assimilation, and both ‹iyev› and ‹ìyev› are acceptable forms of this inflection. Note that because the vowel distinctions of the future and past tenses are lost, there are only three tenses rather than five in the subjunctive mood. Three-way combinations of tense, aspect, and mood do not occur.

Affect
The second (final) infix position is taken by infixes for affect: Speaker attitude, whether positive or negative; formality; and evidentiality to mark for uncertainty or indirect knowledge.


 * {| class=wikitable


 * + Na’vi affect
 * Positive attitude || ei
 * Negative attitude || äng
 * Formal || uy
 * Evidential || ?
 * }
 * Formal || uy
 * Evidential || ?
 * }
 * }

For example, in the greeting in the section on nouns, Oel ngati kameie "I See you", the verb kame "to See" is inflected positively as kam‹ei›e to indicate the pleasure the speaker feels in the meeting. In the subsequent sentence, Oeri ontu teya längu "My nose is full [of his smell]", however, the phrase teya lu "is full" is inflected negatively as teya l‹äng›u to indicate the speaker's distaste at the experience.

The formal infix goes with the formal pronouns: Ngenga ... l‹uy›u set "You are now ...".

Only one affect inflection may be used per verb, so the choice depends on the speaker's priorities. For example, once formality is established, the formal infix can be dropped, clearing the way for other affectual inflections even if the formal pronouns continue to be used.

Although only one affect infix may appear, they may co-occur with first- or second-position infixes in the penultimate syllable:


 * oe t‹ìrm›ar‹ei›on [hunt‹›‹›] "I was just hunting": The speaker is happy about the experience, whether due to success or just the pleasure of the hunt.
 * po t‹ay›ar‹äng›on [hunt‹›‹›] "he will hunt": The speaker is anxious about or bored by the prospect.

Imperatives
There is no infix for the imperative:
 * Kä! Kä! "Go! Go!"
 * Pot lonu! "Release him!"
 * Ikranti makto. ’Eko ta’em "Take the banshee. Attack from above."

Τhe pronoun may be stated overtly:
 * ’Awpot set ftxey ayngal


 * ’awpo-t||set||ftxey||ay-nga-l
 * one-||now||choose||pl-you-
 * }
 * "Now you choose one"
 * "Now you choose one"

Negative imperatives (prohibitives) are conveyed with rä’ä "don't!":
 * Txopu rä’ä si! "Don't be afraid!"
 * Tsakem rä’ä si! "Don't do that!"

Instead of the bare root of the imperative, the subjunctive may be used in its optative role to make a request or polite command:


 * Aynga neto rivikx!


 * ay-nga||ne-to||r‹iv›ikx
 * pl-you||to-away||move‹›
 * }
 * "(May you all) step back!"
 * "(May you all) step back!"

To be, to have
The verb lu is a copula, meaning that it links two concepts together (like an equal sign), as in fo lu kxanì "they are forbidden (here)", where it links a noun phrase and adjective; Na’viyä, l‹uy›u hapxì "(you) are‹› part of the People", where it links two noun phrases ("you" being understood); and tsahìk-u txele lu "the matter is for the Tsahìk". It is the copula lu that makes a predicate out of an adjective: kilvan angim "a long river", kilvan ngim lu "the river is long". As with the English verb "be", lu is also a verb of existence; it is the "there is / there are" verb: aungia l‹ol›u "there was a sign"; ke fparmìl oel futa lu tute a tsun ... "I didn't think there was anyone who could ...". When used with the dative in the sense of "to have", it generally precedes that dative: Lu oeru ikran "I have a banshee".

However, there is also a dedicated verb of existence: tok "to be in a place", as in oehu Txewì trram na’rìngmì t‹arm›ok "yesterday I was with Tewi in the forest" above.

To do
Na’vi has an auxiliary verb si which means "to do" or "to make". It's used in numerous expressions, and is the primary way of turning a noun into a verb: tsam "war", tsam si "to make war", kelku "home", kelku si "to dwell" (lit., "to make (one's) home"); tsap’alute "an apology", tsap’alute si "to apologize" ("to make an apology"), irayo "thanks", irayo si / si irayo "to thank", lrrtok "a smile", lrrtok si "to smile", etc. Si forms idiomatic expressions with the organs of the senses: from nari "eye", nari si "to watch out, be careful"; from eltu "brain", eltu si "to pay attention, quit goofing off".

Although the si may occasionally come before the noun (nga-ru irayo s‹ei›yi or s‹ei›yi irayo oe "I thank you"), the two words behave as an intransitive compound: The noun never takes the accusative suffix, and the subject of si never takes the ergative.

Si can also be used with adjectives, such as teya "full" in kato oeru teya si "the rhythm fills me".

It is not generally used on its own, except when context makes its sense clear:


 * Nga tsap’alute soli srak?
 * "Have you apologized?"


 * Soli.
 * "I have."

To give
The verb "to give", tìng, has a smaller number of idiomatic usages. It is combined with organs of the senses to indicate an attentive action of that sense. So from nari "eye" there is tìng nari ("tìnnari") "to look at" (cf. tse’a "to see"), and from mikyun "ear" there is tìng mikyun ("tìmmikyun") "to listen" (cf. stawm "to hear"). Somewhat less idiomatic are pänutìng "to promise" (lit. "to give promise"), yomtìng "to feed" (lit. "to give to eat"), and teswotìng "to grant" (based on an unattested root).

Modal verbs
As in English, Na’vi has modal verbs ('helping verbs') which have a distinct syntax from other verbs. These are basic verbs of obligation, ability, or desire, such as zene "must", tsun "can", and neu "want". They are followed by a regular verb, which must take the subjunctive mood, whereas English would use the infinitive, as above in zene fko n‹iv›ume nìtxan "there is much to learn" and tsun tutet tsp‹iv›ang ko "they can kill a person, you know". Likewise oe neu k‹iv›ä / neu oe k‹iv›ä, etc. "I want to go". The subject is not repeated if it's the same for the two verbs, but is required otherwise: Oe neu nga k‹iv›ä "I want you to go" (lit. "I want (that) you should go").

Note that the subject of the modal is intransitive regardless of the lexical verb:


 * Oe neu yivom teylut.
 * "I want to eat teylu."

If there is an overt subject to the lexical verb, then it would be inflected for case as it would without the modal.
 * oe||neu||y‹iv›om||teylu-t
 * I||want||eat‹›||grubs-
 * }
 * }

Questions and demonstratives
Yes-no questions may be asked with the final question marker srak?, but sometimes intonation alone is used. Information questions are asked with question words based on the leniting interrogative-pronoun morpheme pe "which?". These need not occur at the beginning of a clause: Oeru pelun "why me?" They are only used for questions, not as relative pronouns as in "I don't know which to choose". Interrogative pe corresponds to demonstrative morphemes fì "this" and tsa "that". The morphemes that combine with these combine with others as well, such as ke "no", fra "every", la "other", and teng "same": The forms based on kem are used when asking or telling what one is doing: Kempe si nga? "What are you doing?"

These are merely the more common forms; pe, fì (and its plural fay "these") and tsa may combine with any noun: fìtxep "this fire", tsaswirä "that creature". For this they are unstressed and do not need the attributive a; compare kea txep / txep ake "no fire" and ke txep "not a fire".

Syntax
As noted above, Na’vi constituent order (subject-object-verb order) is syntactically free—that is, it is determined by discourse factors rather than by syntax. The word order within a noun phrase (demonstrative-numeral-adjective-noun etc.) is similarly free.

Negation, both of noun phrases and of clauses, is made with the grammatical particle ke, which appears before the negated element. The vowel elides in certain lexicalized expressions, such as kawkrr "never" above. As illustrated above and below, double negatives are used.

Conjunction
Various other particles such as conjunctions join phrases and clauses. Examples are sì and últe "and", fu "or", slä "but", na "like, as" (na ayoeng "as we (do), like us"), san (quote), sìk (unquote), fte "so that, in order to", fteke "lest". A is used for relative clauses, as in tute a tsun "a.person who can", futa means "that" after a transitive verb, as in ke fparmìl futa ... "(I) didn't think that ...", fwa means "that" after an intransitive verb, as in law lu oeru fwa ... "It's clear to me that ...", and tsnì means "that" in ätxäle si tsnì ... "(I) request that ...".

The difference between sì "and" and últe "and" is not certain, but it appears that sì joins phrases within a clause, while últe joins clauses. Attested examples include trrä sì txonä "of day and night", win sì txur "fast and strong", and plltxe sì tìran "to speak and walk", but kìyevame ulte Eywa ngahu "See you again, and may Eywa be with you".

Sì may also cliticize to the second noun phrase, as in the formal inclusive pronouns, or in
 * aylì’ut horentisì lì’fyayä leNa’vi
 * "(describe) the words and rules of the Na’vi language"


 * ay-lì’-’u-t||+koren-ti-sì||lì’-fya-yä||le-Na’vi
 * pl-say-thing-||pl+rule--and||say-way-||-People
 * }
 * }

Comparison
Comparative and superlative constructions are marked by -to; where this occurs, there is no need for the word nì’ul "more" (as in txur nì’ul "stronger"):


 * Ts‹ol›e’a||sye?-tute-t||a-tsawl||fra-to||mì-sì-rei.
 * see‹› ||trap?-person- ||-big ||every-than ||in--live
 * }
 * "(and we) saw the biggest Trapper I've ever seen" (lit. 'in (my) life')
 * "(and we) saw the biggest Trapper I've ever seen" (lit. 'in (my) life')

Reported speech
Quoted speech is introduced with the quotative particle san and the unquotative particle sìk. These only allow direct speech, not indirect (reported) speech. If the quotation occurs at either end of the sentence, then only one of the particles need be used:


 * Poltxe oe, san zene ke uniltìranyu ke’uziva’u fìtseng.


 * p‹ol›lltxe||oe||san||zene||ke||unil-tìran-yu||ke-’u||z‹iv›a’u||fì-tseng.
 * say‹›||I||||must||not||dream-walk-er||no-one||come‹›||this-place
 * }
 * "I have said, [quote] 'No avatar may come here'."
 * "I have said, [quote] 'No avatar may come here'."

However, if it occurs in the middle, so that there is non-reported material on either side, then both particles occur together as correlatives:


 * p‹ol›lltxe||Eytukan||san||oe||k‹ay›ä||sìk||slä||oe-l||po-t||ke||spaw
 * say‹›||(name)||||I||go‹›||||but||I-||s/he-||not||believe
 * }
 * "Eytukan said he would go (lit. 'I will go'), but I don't believe him."
 * "Eytukan said he would go (lit. 'I will go'), but I don't believe him."

Subordinate clauses
Some of the subordinating conjunctions, such as those indicating purpose, trigger the subjunctive in a dependent clause:
 * Nari soli ayoe fteke nìhawng livok.
 * "Weundefined were careful not to get too close."


 * nari-s‹ol›i||ayoe||fte-ke||nì-hawng||l‹iv›ok
 * eye-make‹› || we || so.that-not|| -excessive || close‹›
 * }
 * eye-make‹› || we || so.that-not|| -excessive || close‹›
 * }


 * Sáwtute zerá’u fte fol Kélutralti skiva’á.
 * "The humans are coming to (that they may) destroy Hometree."

However, the independent clause is not always made explicit:
 * saw-tute||z‹er›a’u||fte||fo-l||kel-utral-ti||sk‹iv›a’a
 * pl+sky-person||come‹›||so.that||pl+3-||home-tree-||destroy‹›
 * }
 * pl+sky-person||come‹›||so.that||pl+3-||home-tree-||destroy‹›
 * }
 * Txo new nga rivey, oehu!
 * "(Come) with me if you want to live."


 * txo||new||nga||r‹iv›ey||oe-hu
 * if || want || you || to.live‹› || me-with
 * }
 * if || want || you || to.live‹› || me-with
 * }

Relative clauses
Na’vi does not have relative pronouns such as English who, which, what; instead, the attributive particle a is employed:




 * tute|| a ||tsun||nì-Na’vi||plltxe
 * person||||be.able||-Na’vi||speak
 * }
 * "a person who can speak Na’vi"
 * "a person who can speak Na’vi"

It wouldn't matter if the phrase were "a thing which" (or "that"), "a time when", or "a reason why"; all would use the same particle a to translate the English wh- word. This is the same morpheme as the a in attributive adjectives; indeed, relative clauses can be thought of as multi-word adjectives: The example above might be more literally translated as "an able-to-speak-Na’vi person", with "able to speak Na’vi" being an attributive (≈ adjective).

A slightly more complex example along the same lines is,
 * ’Awpot set ftxey ayngal a l-ayngakip, ’awpot a Na’viru yomtìyìng.
 * "Choose one among you (that is, 'one who is among you'), one who will feed the People."


 * ’awpo-t||set||ftxey||ay-nga-l||a||lu||ay-nga-kip,||’awpo-t||a||Na’vi-ru||yom+t‹ìy›ìng
 * one-||now||choose||-you-||||be||-you-among||one-||||People-||eat+give‹›
 * }
 * (Lit, "you-all choose an is-among-you individual, a will-feed-the-People individual")
 * (Lit, "you-all choose an is-among-you individual, a will-feed-the-People individual")

Here, in ’awpot a Na’viru yomtìyìng "one who will feed the People", the attributive a is not adjacent to the verb, and so cannot be attached to it in writing the way it is attached to adjectives.

The attributive a is also used when a prepositional phrase modifies a noun. In English, "the cat in the hat" can be thought of as "the cat which is in the hat", with the verb 'to be' dropped. In Na'vi, though the 'be' need not be said, the a 'which' must be:


 * Fìpo lu vrrtep a mìsokx atsleng
 * "It is a demon in a false body"


 * fì-po||lu||vrrtep||a||mì+tokx||a-tsleng
 * this-one||||demon||||in+body||-false
 * }
 * }

In cases where English uses a stranded preposition, as in "someone to talk with ", Na’vi needs to repeat the noun or a pronoun:


 * Ke lu kawtu a nulnivew oe pohu tireapivängkxo äo Vitrautral.
 * "There’s nobody I’d rather commune with under the Tree of Souls"

Or literally, "There isn't nobody that I'd more like to commune with them under the Tree of Souls."
 * ke||lu||ke-’aw-tu||a||nì-ul-n‹iv›ew||oe||po-hu||tirea-p‹iv›ängkxo||äo||vitra-utral
 * not||be||not-a-one||||-more-want‹›||I||him/her-with||spirit-converse‹›||under||soul-tree
 * }
 * }

Clause order
This kind of subordinating strategy is common among human fixed-order verb-final languages such as Japanese, Korean, and Turkish. Indeed, though these examples followed the English word order of subordinate clause following the noun it modifies, the human verb-final order of subordinate clause preceding the noun is also possible in Na’vi:


 * Tsun oe ngahu nì-Na’vi pivängkxo a fì’u oeru prrte’ lu.
 * "It’s a pleasure to be able to chat with you in Na’vi."


 * tsun||oe||nga-hu||nì-Na’vi||p‹iv›ängkxo||a||fì-’u||oe-ru||prrte’||lu
 * be.able || I. || you-with || -Na’vi || chat‹› || || this-thing || I- || pleasure? || be
 * }
 * (Lit. "this being-able-to-chat-with-you-in-Na’vi thing is a pleasure to me")
 * }
 * (Lit. "this being-able-to-chat-with-you-in-Na’vi thing is a pleasure to me")

The contrast can be seen in the following, where a relative clause is used to nominalize a clause in order for it to form a topic:


 * Ngal oeyä ’upxaret aysuteru fpole’ a fì’uri, ngaru irayo seiyi oe nìtxan!
 * "Thank you very much for sending my message to people!"

or conversely,
 * nga-l||oe-eyä||’upxare-t||ay+tute-ru||fp‹ol›e’||a||fì-’u-ri||nga-ru||irayo||s‹ei›i||oe||nì-txan
 * you-||I-||message-||pl+person-||send‹›||||this-thing-||you-||thank||do‹›||I.||-much
 * }
 * }
 * Furia ngal oeyä ’upxaret aysuteru fpole’, ngaru irayo seiyi oe nìtxan!


 * fì-’u-ri-a||nga-l||oe-eyä||’upxare-t||ay+sute-ru||fp‹ol›e’||nga-ru||irayo||s‹ei›i||oe||nì-txan
 * this-thing--||you-||I-||message-||pl+person-||send‹›||you-||thank||do‹›||I.||-much
 * }
 * }

"Because" for the English clause order (verb-X because verb-Y) is either taweyk(a) (from oeyk "cause") or talun(a) (from lun "reason"). With the opposite clause order, the forms switch to aweykta and alunta.

Relative clauses with empty nouns
In the previous examples, the relative clause modified a pronoun, fì’u "this", which did little except to anchor the relative clause. By inflecting pronoun for case, this allows the relative clause to play various roles in the sentence. For example, the pronoun may be in the accusative, fì’ut, which when followed by a plays the role of "that" in "I think that [X]":


 * Ke fparmìl oel futa lu tute a tsun nì-Na’vi set fìfya pivlltxe!
 * "I didn't think that there was anyone who could speak Na’vi like that at this point!"


 * ke||fp‹arm›ìl||oe-l||fì-’u-t = a||lu||tute||a||tsun||nì-Na’vi||set||fì-fya||''p‹iv›lltxe
 * not || think‹› || I- || this-thing-= || be || person || || be_able || -Na’vi || now || this-way || speak‹›
 * }
 * (Lit. "I didn't think this [X] thing", where [X] is "there is a can-now-thus-speak-Na’vi person".)
 * }
 * (Lit. "I didn't think this [X] thing", where [X] is "there is a can-now-thus-speak-Na’vi person".)

As an accusative form, futa is used with an ergative agent when the main verb is transitive. With an intransitive clause, the form would be fwa, a contraction of fì’u-a.


 * Law lu oeru fwa nga mì reltseo nolume nìtxan!
 * "It's clear to me that you've learned a lot in art."


 * law||lu||oe-ru||fì-’u-a||nga||mì||rel-tseo||n‹ol›ume||nì-txan
 * clear||be||I-||this-thing-||you||in||image-art||learn‹›||-great
 * }
 * }

Tsnì is also used with an intransitive main verb such as sìlpey "to hope" or noun + si :


 * Ätxäle si tsnì livu oheru Uniltaron.
 * "I (respectfully) request (that I have) the Initiation."

(If the "I" were spoken here, it would be of the form oe.)
 * ätxäle||si||tsnì||l‹iv›u||ohe-ru||unil-taron
 * request||make||that||be‹›||I.-||dream-hunt
 * }
 * request||make||that||be‹›||I.-||dream-hunt
 * }

Both the tsnì and the subjunctive may be dropped, in which case a clause like "I hope" functions as a discourse particle, coordinate to the adjacent clause:


 * Sìlpey oe, layu oeru ye’rìn sìltsana fmawn a tsun oe ayngaru tivìng.
 * "I hope I will soon have good news to give you."


 * sìlpey||oe
 * hope || I
 * l‹ay›u||oe-ru||ye’rìn||sìltsan-a||fmawn||a||tsun||oe||ay-nga-ru||t‹iv›ìng
 * be‹›||I-||soon||good-||news||||can||I||pl-you-||give‹›
 * }
 * be‹›||I-||soon||good-||news||||can||I||pl-you-||give‹›
 * }
 * }

Other small grammatical words than pronouns may head the relative clause. On of them, krr "time", behaves as an adverb in that it does not take case endings to show its relationship to the main verb:


 * Tìeyngit oel tolel a krr, ayngaru payeng.
 * "When I get an answer, I'll tell you."


 * tì-eyng-it||oe-l||t‹ol›el||a||krr||ay-nga-ru||p‹ay›eng
 * -to.answer-||I-||receive‹›||||time||pl-you-||tell‹›
 * }
 * }

Note that the verb 'get' is perfective, even though it is not in the past, as I do not plan on telling you until the event of getting the answer is complete.

Transitivity
Many verbs may be either transitive or intransitive, depending on the context. For example, pey may be either "wait" (intransitive) or "await" (transitive):


 * Nìaynga oe perey nìteng.
 * "Like you, I too am waiting."


 * nì-ay-nga||oe||p‹er›ey||nì-teng
 * -pl-you||I||wait‹›||-same
 * }
 * }


 * Oe tsun pivey trrit a nga tayìng ayoer(u) nì'ul.
 * "I can await the day when you will give us more."


 * oe||tsun||p‹iv›ey||trr-it||a||nga||t‹ay›ìng||ay-oe-ru||nì-’ul
 * I||can||wait‹›||day-||||you||give‹›||pl-I-||-more
 * }
 * }

General action, without any specific object, as in English "I ate too much", is intransitive, whereas an implied but unstated object, as in "he ate some (of it)", is transitive. Thus,


 * Oe taron
 * "I hunt"

Here the speaker is merely saying that hunting is an activity that they engage in; this equivalent to such intransitive clauses as "I walk". An overt object, on the other hand, requires that the agent be in the ergative case:
 * oe||taron
 * I. ||hunt
 * }
 * }


 * Oel tolaron pa’lit
 * "I hunted a direhorse"

If, however, the agent is in the ergative case, but there is no expressed object, then an omitted object is understood. So if asked about yerik, the speaker might say,
 * oe-l||t‹ol›aron||pa’li-t
 * I- ||hunt‹›||direhorse-
 * }
 * }


 * Taron oel kop.
 * "I hunt them too"


 * taron||oe-l||kop
 * hunt|| I- || as.well
 * }
 * }

In the case a relative clause removed either the subject or object of a dependent clause, the case of the other, and the transitivity of the dependent verb, are unaffected:


 * Ikran a tolaron oel tsawl lu nìtxan.
 * "The banshee I hunted was very big."

Here ikran is in the intransitive case because it is the subject of lu "to be"; however, oel remains in the ergative, since the object ikranit is understood from the context.
 * ikran||a||t‹ol›aron||oe-l||tsawl||lu||nì-txan
 * banshee.||||hunt‹›|| I- || big || be || -great
 * }
 * }

Lexicon
Frommer had created a thousand words for Na’vi by the time Avatar was released. These include a few English loan words such as kunsìp "gunship" and toktor "doctor". Although the current lexicon is small, Frommer has stated that with further development it could be used for everyday conversation.

A few conversational items are,
 * káme "to See" (to see into and understand a person)
 * oél ngáti kámeie "I See you" (a greeting)
 * káme ngát "See you" (a shortened response)
 * kìyeváme "good-bye; See you soon"
 * kaltxì "hello"
 * ngaru lu fpom srak? "how are you?"
 * rutxé "please"
 * iráyo or iréiyo "thank you"
 * óe ngáru seiyí iréiyo / seiyí iráyo "I thank you"
 * Fyape fko syaw ngar? "What's your name?" (lit., "How does one call you?")
 * Oeru syaw (fko) X. Ngaru tut? "(They) call me X. And you?"
 * yawne "beloved"
 * nga yáwne lu oér "I love you"
 * oéru txóa livú "forgive me"
 * Éywa ngáhu "God (Gaia) be with you"
 * skxáwng! "moron!"
 * pxasìk "screw that!; no way!"
 * óe ómum "I know"
 * tslolám "got it; understood."
 * tsún tivám "not bad/pretty good" (that should do / good enough)
 * X nìNá’vi slu ’úpe? "how do you say X in Na’vi?"

Na’vi has insults, such as skxawng, and rude words, such as pxasìk, but no words considered obscene. One may, however, be suggestive, as below.

Compounds
Many words are created by compounding, which is effected by simply joining the elements together: kämákto "to ride out", from kä "to go" and makto "to ride"; éltungawng (a species of hallucinogenic worm), from eltu "a brain" and ngawng "a worm"; ftéke "lest", from fte "so that" and ke "not". In compounds with a monosyllabic verb, it may be the second element which inflects, even when the inflection would be expected before that, as in yomtìng "to feed" (lit. "to give to eat"), where the first-position infix ìy appears instead in the final syllable: yom-t‹ìy›ìng.

Compounds are often truncated, for example prrnesyul "bud" from prrnen "infant" + syulang "flower".

Changing parts of speech
Adjectives may be derived from nouns with le-: hrrap "danger", lehrrap "dangerous". (The attributive a- is generally dropped before this le-.) Adverbs are formed with nì-: ftúe "easy", nìftúe "easily"; ayoeng "us", nìayoeng "like us". Abstract nouns may be derived from verbs and adjectives with the prefix tì-: rey "to live", tìrey "life"; ngay "true", tìngay, "truth". People or things affected by a verb are indicated by compounding with -tu: spe’é "to capture", spe’étu "a captive". A person who specializes in a verb (English -er) is indicated with -yu: táron "to hunt", táronyu "hunter".

Original vocabulary
Frommer closely followed the lead of Cameron, who had invented three dozen Na’vi personal, plant, and animal names for the film script. Cameron had been to New Zealand a few years before, and says that he had the sound of the Māori language in mind when he came up with the names; Frommer also noticed a Polynesian feel. The Na’vi words and names in the script, followed in italics by Frommer's adaptations where these differ, are:

Na’vi, Omaticaya (Omatikaya) (clan name), Neytíri, atokirina’ (seeds of the Great Tree), Tsu’téy, tsahik (tsáhìk) "shaman", Éytukan, Eywa "Gaia", Mó’at, Neytiri (te Ckaha) Mo’at’ite "Neytiri of the Tskaha, daughter of Mo’at", teylu "grubs", Silwanin, shahaylu (tsaheylu) "neural bond", ikran "banshee", taronyu "hunter", seyri "lip", ontu "nose", mikyun "ear", nari "eye", ireiyo "thank you", Iknimaya (approx. "stairway to heaven"), sa’atenuk (sa’nok) "mother", toruk "last shadow", Vitraya Ramunong ("well of souls") (≈ ayvitrayä ramunong), Toruk Macto (toruk makto) "rider of last shadow", uniltaron "dream hunt", utraya mokri (utral aymokriyä) "tree of voices", Ninat, Beyral (Peyral), olo’eyctan (olo’eyktan) "clan leader", Tsu’tey te Rongloa Ateyitan "Tsu’tey of the Rongloa, son of Ateyo",

Since that time Cameron has coined a few other words, such as Eywa’éveng "child of Eywa" for the Na’vi world of Pandora, which have been incorporated into the language.

Phrases
Fìskxawngìri tsap’alute sengi oe.

"I apologise for this moron."


 * fì-skxawng-ìri||tsap’alute||s‹eng›i||oe
 * this-moron- ||apology || make‹?› || I
 * }
 * this-moron- ||apology || make‹?› || I
 * }

Fayvrrtep fìtsenge lu kxanì.

"These demons are forbidden here."


 * f-ay-vrrtep||fì-tseng-e||lu||kxanì
 * this--demon || this-place-? || be || forbidden
 * }
 * this--demon || this-place-? || be || forbidden
 * }

Oeri ta peyä fahew akewong ontu teya längu.

"(Eew,) my nose is full of his alien smell."


 * oe-ri||ta||pe-yä||fahew||a-kewong||ontu||teya||l‹äng›u
 * me- || from || s/he- || smell || -alien || nose || full || be‹›
 * }
 * me- || from || s/he- || smell || -alien || nose || full || be‹›
 * }

Kìyevame ulte Eywa ngahu.

"See you again, and may Eywa be with you."


 * k‹ìy›‹iv›ame||ulte||Eywa||nga=hu
 * See‹›‹› || and || Eywa || you=with
 * }
 * See‹›‹› || and || Eywa || you=with
 * }

Tawsìp ngeyä lu sngeltseng.

"Your ship is a garbage scow." [translation from Klingon]


 * taw+sìp || ngeyä||lu||sngel+tseng
 * sky+ship || your || be || garbage+place
 * }
 * sky+ship || your || be || garbage+place
 * }

Ayftxozä lefpom ayngaru nìwotx!

"Happy Holidays to you all!"


 * ay-ftxozä||le-fpom||ay-nga-ru||nì-wotx
 * pl-holiday || -well_being || pl-you-||-all
 * }
 * pl-holiday || -well_being || pl-you-||-all
 * }

Mipa zìsìt lefpom ngaru!

"Happy New Year!"


 * mip-a||zìsìt||le-fpom||nga-ru
 * new- || year || -well_being || you.-
 * }
 * new- || year || -well_being || you.-
 * }

Lì’fya ngeyä sìltsan leiu nìtxan.

"Your (use of) language is very good!"


 * lì’-fya||ngeyä||sìltsan || l‹ei›u || nì-txan
 * speak?-way || your || good || be‹› || -great
 * }
 * speak?-way || your || good || be‹› || -great
 * }

’Awve ultxari ohengeyä, Nawma Sa’nok lrrtok siveiyi.

"May the Great Mother smile upon our first meeting."




 * ’awve||ultxa-ri||ohe-nga-yä||nawm-a||sa’nok||lrrtok||''s‹iv›‹ei›i
 * first||meeting-||I.+you-||great-||mother||smile||make‹›‹›
 * }
 * }

Oeyä ikran slivu nga, tsakrr oeng ’awsiteng mivakto.

"Be my banshee and let's ride together."




 * oe-yä||ikran||sl‹iv›u||nga||tsa-krr||oe+nga||’aw-si-teng||m‹iv›akto
 * I-||banshee||become‹›||you||that-time||I+you||one-make-same||ride‹›
 * }
 * }