How would you say "to show"

[jan Seloki]

Should "to show" be kama e lukin (cause to see) or ken e lukin (allow to see) or is there really a difference? In other words should " I'll show you a picture" be "mi kama e ni:sina li lukin e sitelen" or "mi ken e ni: sina lukin e sitelen".

[jan Jojanese]

"i'll show you a picture" - mi pana lukin e sitelen tawa sina

[janKipo]

Well, the first two give the wrong notion since the direct object in a causative construction is the subject of the caused action so this is”cause or allow a view”, which misses the point a bit. The third, two-sentence, solution is safe. The last involves a new idiom but looks like it should work.

[janTepanNetaPelin]

Should "to show" be kama e lukin (cause to see) or ken e lukin (allow to see) or is there really a difference? In other words should " I'll show you a picture" be "mi kama e ni:sina li lukin e sitelen" or "mi ken e ni: sina lukin e sitelen".

"kama e lukin" and "ken e lukin" should work, but it's unnecessarily specific to me, whereas "pana e ijo tawa lukin" works for me all the time: "mi pana e sitelen tawa lukin sina".

[janTepanNetaPelin]

"i'll show you a picture" - mi pana lukin e sitelen tawa sina

"pana lukin" reflects the speaker's need to have one string of words ("pana lukin") for one vocabulary item ("show"). It does stretch "lukin" as a modifier though, as "showing" is none of "gift of the eye", "eye-giving" (which would be "seeing") or "visually giving". I prefer "pana e ijo tawa lukin", because it leverages Toki Pona's precision and doesn't resort to calque-guess-work behind a stretched usage of a modifier. ("pana lukin e ijo" would still be understood.)

"mi pana e sitelen tawa lukin sina."