Relative Clauses in Hawaiian

In Brief

A Hawaiian relative clause normally comes after the noun it describes: ka wahine i hele mai means “the woman who came.” Hawaiian does not need a direct equivalent of every English relative word—“who,” “that,” “which,” “where,” or “when.” The form of the clause depends instead on the role that the described noun would have inside it.

Overview

A relative clause is a clause—a group of words built around a predicate—that gives more information about a noun (a word for a person, place, thing, or idea). In “the woman who came,” the noun is “woman,” and “who came” identifies or describes her. Hawaiian uses the same basic order: the noun comes first and the descriptive clause follows it.

This B1 topic matters because relative clauses let you combine short statements without repeatedly naming the same person or thing. Compare the idea “I read a book; the book was interesting” with “the book that I read was interesting.” In Hawaiian, this often requires more than replacing English “that” with one fixed word. You must notice whether the earlier noun is the person doing the action, the thing affected by it, or a place, time, or other circumstance.

The main patterns in this article are deliberately presented from simplest to more complex. First learn to recognize a following clause such as i hele mai. Then learn the framed patterns aʻu i ... ai and nāna i .... These patterns build on ordinary complex sentences and lead naturally to a fuller study of the particle ai.

How It Works

1. Put the descriptive clause after the noun

The basic shape is:

noun phrase + modifying clause

In ka wahine i hele mai, ka wahine is the head noun (the noun being described), and i hele mai tells you which woman is meant.

Hawaiian	English	Note
ka wahine i hele mai	the woman who came	The woman performs the action.
ke keiki e hula ana	the child who is dancing	The ongoing-action frame remains in the clause.
ka poʻe e kali nei	the people who are waiting here/now	nei connects the action with the present situation.

The relative clause keeps Hawaiian predicate markers such as i, e ... ana, ke ... nei, or ua. Their exact contribution depends on the sentence: they locate or present the event rather than functioning as translations of “who” or “that.”

English requires an overt relative word in many such examples. Hawaiian can simply place the clause after the noun. Do not insert an invented Hawaiian equivalent of “who” between every noun and verb.

2. When the head noun is the missing participant

Ask how the head noun relates to the modifying clause. In ka wahine i hele mai, the woman is understood as the one who came. There is no separate pronoun meaning “she” inside the clause.

This compact pattern is especially clear when the head noun is the subject (the person or thing doing or experiencing what the predicate says):

• ka haumāna i pane mai — the student who answered
• ka ʻīlio e holo ana — the dog that was running
• nā malihini i hiki mai — the visitors who arrived

A complete sentence may place this whole noun phrase in a larger frame:

Ua ʻike au i ka wahine i hele mai. — “I saw the woman who came.”

Here au is the subject of “saw,” while ka wahine is described by i hele mai. Reading from left to right, first identify the larger sentence and then attach the following descriptive clause to the nearest sensible noun.

3. The aʻu i ... ai pattern

When the head noun is not the actor but has another role within the relative clause—often the thing acted on, the place, or the time—a common pattern is:

head noun + a-form identifying the clause’s actor + predicate marker + predicate + ai

The model example is:

ka puke aʻu i heluhelu ai — “the book that I read”

The book comes first. Aʻu identifies “I/me” as the actor in the embedded clause, i heluhelu presents the reading event, and final ai points back into that earlier context. For learning purposes, memorize the whole frame rather than treating ai as an English relative pronoun.

Common singular actor forms in this frame include:

Hawaiian form	English value	Example frame
aʻu	my / by me; “I” in this pattern	ka puke aʻu i heluhelu ai
āu	your / by you; “you” in this pattern	ka mele āu i lohe ai
āna	his/her; “he or she” in this pattern	ka hana āna i hana ai

These resemble Hawaiian possessive forms, but their job here is best learned as part of the relative-clause construction. Longer plural and inclusive/exclusive forms follow the same general system, but use them only after you are comfortable with Hawaiian possessors and pronouns.

The head noun need not be a physical object:

• ka wahi aʻu i noho ai — the place where I lived
• ka manawa āna i hiki ai — the time when he or she arrived
• ke kumu a lākou i hoʻi ai — the reason they returned

English changes among “that,” “where,” “when,” and “why.” Hawaiian can use a related a-form ... ai structure because ai resumes the relevant place, time, reason, or participant understood from the head noun.

4. The nāna i ... agent pattern

Another important pattern explicitly presents the person responsible for an action:

person described + nāna i + action

ke kanaka nāna i kūkulu i ka hale — “the person who built the house”

Nāna can be understood roughly as “by him/her” or “the one responsible for it.” It highlights agency or responsibility more strongly than a bare following clause. Related forms identify different agents:

Hawaiian	English	Note
naʻu	by me / mine to do	unmarked vowel
nāu	by you / yours to do	long vowel on nā-
nāna	by him or her / his or hers to do	common in agent relatives

In actual sentences, context determines whether these forms express an agent, responsibility, or a possessive idea. In a relative pattern such as ke kanaka nāna i kūkulu..., the agent reading is clear. Preserve the kahakō (macron): nāna and nana are not safely interchangeable in careful writing.

5. A practical decision process

When building or interpreting a relative clause, use these questions:

1. Which noun is being described? Find it before the clause.
2. Who performs the embedded action? If the head noun does, a simple following clause may work.
3. Is another actor stated while the head noun supplies an object, place, time, or reason? Expect a pattern such as aʻu i ... ai.
4. Is agency or responsibility being highlighted? A naʻu/nāu/nāna pattern may be appropriate.
5. Which aspect or tense marker fits the event? Keep the normal Hawaiian clause frame rather than translating English word for word.

Examples in Context

Hawaiian	English	Note
Ka wahine i hele mai.	The woman who came.	Simple subject relative.
Ua kamaʻilio au me ke kumu i kōkua mai.	I spoke with the teacher who helped.	The teacher is the helper.
Eia ke keiki e hula ana.	Here is the child who is dancing.	Ongoing action.
Makemake au i ka puke aʻu i heluhelu ai.	I like the book that I read.	The book is what was read.
ʻO kēia ke mele āu i lohe ai.	This is the song that you heard.	Āu identifies “you” as actor.
Ua ʻike mākou i ka hana āna i hana ai.	We saw the work that he or she did.	The repeated hana has different jobs: noun and verb.
ʻO Hilo ka wahi aʻu i noho ai.	Hilo is the place where I lived.	Place resumed by ai.
Poʻakahi ka lā a lākou i hoʻi ai.	Monday is the day when they returned.	Time expression as head noun.
ʻO ia ke kumu a mākou i kali ai.	That is the reason we waited.	Reason understood from context.
Ua mahalo lākou i ke kanaka nāna i kūkulu i ka hale.	They thanked the person who built the house.	Nāna highlights the builder.
ʻO wai ka mea nāna i kākau i kēia leka?	Who is the person who wrote this letter?	A natural question about the responsible agent.
Ua nalowale ke kī aʻu i waiho ai ma ka pākaukau.	The key that I left on the table disappeared.	The larger sentence continues outside the relative clause.

Notice that English translations may contain words absent as separate items in Hawaiian. That is normal. A good translation preserves the relationship between the noun and clause; it does not need to match word for word.

Common Mistakes

Putting the relative clause before the noun

• Wrong: i hele mai ka wahine when you mean only “the woman who came”
• Right: ka wahine i hele mai
• Why: A Hawaiian modifying clause follows its head noun. The wrong order is read as an ordinary clause, “the woman came,” rather than the intended noun phrase.

Looking for one word that always means “that”

• Wrong approach: inserting the same particle after every noun because English has “who/that/which”
• Right: ka wahine i hele mai; ka puke aʻu i heluhelu ai
• Why: Hawaiian chooses a construction according to the noun’s role. The subject pattern and the aʻu ... ai pattern are not interchangeable word-for-word templates.

Omitting ai from a learned resumptive frame

• Wrong: ka wahi aʻu i noho
• Right: ka wahi aʻu i noho ai
• Why: In this standard relative pattern, ai links the place back to the earlier head noun. Learn aʻu i noho ai as a unit.

Treating ai as if it simply meant “where”

• Wrong assumption: ai = “where” in every sentence
• Right understanding: ai can resume different relationships: ka puke ... ai (that), ka wahi ... ai (where), and ka manawa ... ai (when).
• Why: Its interpretation comes from the head noun and the whole clause.

Confusing aʻu and naʻu/nāna

• Wrong: choosing one only because both translations mention an English subject pronoun
• Right: memorize complete contrasts such as ka puke aʻu i heluhelu ai and ke kanaka nāna i kūkulu...
• Why: The first frames another actor inside a resumptive relative; the second foregrounds the responsible agent. Their forms and functions differ.

Dropping Hawaiian diacritics

• Wrong: nana, au, or ana when the intended words are nāna, aʻu, or āna
• Right: write the ʻokina and kahakō consistently.
• Why: These marks represent meaningful sounds and can distinguish words. They are not optional decoration.

Usage Notes

In conversation, context often makes a short relative clause easy to understand. Speakers do not need to reproduce English “who” or “that,” and English can even omit “that” in “the book I read.” The similarity stops there, however: Hawaiian predicate markers and resumptive ai still follow Hawaiian structure.

Relative clauses can either identify the exact referent (“the book that I read”) or simply add information (“my aunt, who lives in Hilo”). Punctuation in English translations may show that distinction, but Hawaiian interpretation also depends on context, intonation, and the surrounding discourse. Do not expect commas alone to encode every difference.

The nāna i construction is especially useful when the identity of the doer or responsibility for the action matters: who made something, wrote something, discovered something, or caused an outcome. A simpler subject-relative pattern may be possible in some contexts, but it may not carry exactly the same focus. Choose from examples used by proficient speakers rather than mechanically replacing every subject relative with nāna.

Beyond the Basics / Advanced Use

Relative constructions interact with Hawaiian’s broader voice, possession, tense-aspect, and information-structure systems. For example, a speaker may choose a passive expression when the affected participant matters more than the actor, or an agent expression with nāna when responsibility is central. These are choices of viewpoint, not merely alternative translations of English “who.”

The particle ai also occurs outside straightforward noun-modifying examples. It can resume a previously established place, time, reason, or circumstance in subordinate structures, as in the related pattern no laila i hele ai au—“that is why I went.” This wider use explains why memorizing ai as “where” or “that” eventually causes trouble. At an advanced level, analyze what earlier element ai points back to and what syntactic position that element would occupy.

Long relative clauses can contain their own objects and modifiers:

ke kanaka nāna i kūkulu i ka hale ma ke kahakai — “the person who built the house by the shore.”

Context must show whether a phrase such as ma ke kahakai belongs inside the relative clause or modifies something outside it. When writing, avoid stacking too many modifiers if a shorter sentence would be clearer. When reading, locate the head noun, identify the embedded predicate frame, and only then decide where the clause ends.

Finally, English relative pronouns mark distinctions such as person versus thing. Hawaiian constructions organize the information differently. Fluency comes from learning recurring Hawaiian frames in full—not from building a dictionary of equivalents for “who,” “which,” “whose,” “where,” and “when.”

Practice Tips

1. Combine two short statements. Start with pairs such as “I read the book. The book is good.” Then build ka puke aʻu i heluhelu ai. Say what role the repeated noun has before choosing a pattern.
2. Make three example sets. Keep separate lists for simple subject relatives, aʻu/āu/āna ... ai relatives, and naʻu/nāu/nāna i agent relatives. This prevents similar-looking forms from blending together.
3. Listen for the endpoints. In Hawaiian audio, pause mentally after the head noun and listen for a predicate marker; when you hear final ai, ask what earlier place, time, thing, or reason it resumes.

Related Concepts

• Prerequisite: Complex Sentence Patterns — provides the clause frames and connectors needed before combining ideas inside a noun phrase.
• Next step: The Particle ai — develops the resumptive use seen in ka wahi aʻu i noho ai and related subordinate structures.