After reading the clause you presented a few times, I still couldn't understand clearly what it meant because the objects of the verbs were not there. Even the AI translation was "looking" for them by indicating their absence with "[it]".
From the video, this is the longer clause where it came from:
"... at sana mahabal (no such word, it should be mahabOl) ko itong animation na ito bago mag-Christmas kasa (should be kasO) hindi ko na naabot kasi na-enjoy ko ang vacation at pinaabot ko na ng birthday ko."
It seems like AI speech-to-text conversion was used for the subtitle because of the misspellings. Anyway, the translation of the clause is:
"... and hopefully, I could catch up with this animation before Christmas. However, I was not able to reach it because I ended up enjoying the vacation and I extended it up to my birthday."
(Note: The part that begins with "kaso" should have been a separate sentence. "Kaso" should be "Ang kaso, (the thing is/however)", but the speaker shortened it and said the entire clause in one breath. What he did is not a problem if spoken, but when written, the omission and the needed break in the sentence become noticeable.)
This is what I think the speaker actually meant to say if the objects are added in:
"... and hopefully, I could CATCH UP with the deadline for completing this animation before Christmas. However, I was not able to REACH (meet) that deadline because I ended up enjoying the vacation and just EXTENDED the completion of the animation up to my birthday.".
So, he is not catching up with the animation, which does not really make sense, but the completion deadline for the animation. The first [it] is the deadline and the second [it] is the completion of the animation.
With that, the 3 verbs in the entire clause - mahabol, naabot, pinaabot - are, therefore, wrong.
They should have been MAIHABOL, INABOT, and IPINAABOT.
"... at sana MAIHABOL ko itong animation na ito bago mag-Christmas. Ang kaso, hindi ko na INABOT kasi na-enjoy ko ang vacation at IPINAABOT ko na ng birthday ko."
With the correct verbs, it would be easier to figure out what they are likely referring to.
MAIH
ABOL = to be able to finish/complete something by the deadline; to be able to bring something in time to where it is needed.
IN
ABOT (infinitive: ab
utin - IN
ABOT, ina
abot, aab
utin) = was able to reach something (deadline) for something (completion of animation)
IPINA
ABOT (infinitive: ipa
abot - IPINA
ABOT, ipinaa
abot, ipaa
abot) = extended something (the completion of the animation) to something (his birthday).
The problem is, in the original clause, the first 2 verbs used are subject-focus. The 3rd verb is just wrong because that conjugation belongs to the second meaning of "abot", which I will explain below. The corrected 3 verbs have an "I" added or inserted into them because they should object-focus verbs instead. The subject of the verbs is the objects - the animation, the deadline, the completion - and not the actor (the speaker).
The root word "abot" has two meanings depending on how it is pronounced. Both meanings though are about "reaching".
Abot (no stress) - extending to or reaching something, e.g., a deadline, a location or a destination.
Ab
ót - reaching for something or extending something to someone.
The root word of the first 2 verbs used in the clause from the video is "abot (no stress)". When it is used to form verbs though, the conjugations may include stresses.
Paabut``in: PINAAB
ÓT, pina
áab
ót, pa
áabut
ín