toki tan ma Oselija!

[majika]

toki! mi wile e ni: sina kama sona e mi. nimi mi li jan Majika. mi kama tan ma Oselija.
tenpo mun pini la mi kama kute pi toki pona, li mi wile kama sona e ona. tenpo ni la mi wile kama sona e jan ante pi toki pona.
toki pona li pona mute tawa mi! ona li pilin pali tawa mi.. taso mi wile sona pona e ona.
mi wile e ni: toki pona mi li pakala la, sina kama sona e ona tawa mi.
mi tawa!

Hi! I'd like to introduce myself to you. My name's Mike and I come from Australia.
Last month I heard about Toki Pona, and I wanted to learn it. Now I'd like to get to know other Toki Pona people.
I really like Toki Pona! I find it difficult, but I'd like to know it well.
Please, if there are mistakes in my Toki Pona, can you let me know?
Bye!

[janMato]

pona a! I'm impressed.

mi tan ma Oselija.

For some reason kama makes it sound like you've just got off the plane.

tenpo mun pini la mi kama kute pi toki pona li [X] wile kama sona e ona.

The subject must not repeat in a li-chain.

mi wile e ni: toki pona mi li pakala la, sina [pona/pana sona] e ona tawa mi.

"you cause it to be good for me"
"you give knowledge of it (the errors) to me"

mi tawa!

This certainly would be recognized by everyone and is cannonical & common, but somehow, I have felt that "mi tawa" works best in person and seems out of place in written communication. Also, "mi tawa" is subtly negative, as compared to most cultures good-byes which are "we'll meet again".

ken la ni li pona: "tenpo kama la sin la mi mute li toki."

[janKipo]

kama pona tawa toki pona toki sina nanpa wan li pona mute. taso
What Mato said (though I am not sure about the parting - any convention will do).
'nimi mi li Jan Majika'. Your name is not a person (and you are not a word), as your sentence claims. Say just 'mi jan Majika' or 'nimi mi li nimi "Majika"'. (arrant pedantry, but why not do it right, especially when it seems natural?).

[majika]

<corrected text>

jan Mato o! jan Kipo o! toki! ona li pona tawa mi: sina sitelen tawa mi. mi pona tan ni: sina pona e pakala pi toki pona mi.

sina tan ma seme? mi wile sona e ni: jan pi toki pona li lon ala lon ma ali? lon la ni li pona tawa mi!

tenpo kama la mi mute li toki

jan Majika

-------- sitelen nanpa wan mi li lon anpa li jo e pakala! --------

o jan Mato en jan Kipo: toki! ona li pona tawa mi: sina sitelen tawa mi. mi pona tan ni: sina pona e pakala pi toki pona mi.

sina tan ma seme? mi pilin pi wile sona e ni: jan pi toki pona lon ala lon ma ali? lon la ona li pona tawa mi!

tenpo kama la mi mute li toki

jan Majika

[janMato]

o jan Mato en jan Kipo: toki!

I think the o's chain. And in vocative, they follow the phrase.

jan Mato o! jan Kipo o!

en certainly joins subjects, maybe the arguments of prepositional phrases, and maybe modifiers, especially if you are indicating mixture, jan pi wawa en sona.

sina tan ma seme? mi pilin pi wile sona e ni: jan pi toki pona lon ala lon ma ali?

jan pi toki pona li lon ma Nijon en ma Sopisi en ma Tosi en ma Mewika en ma Mesiko en ma Losi en ma Kanse en ma Pasila, en ma Inli.

(Japan, Serbia, Germany, America, Mexico, Germany, France, Brazil, England). So far the pattern I see is that these are also countries with Esperanto fans-- which isn't surprising since jan Sonja is an Esperantist. Asia (other than Japan) and Africa are severely under-represented.

[janKipo]

jan Mato en mi li tan ma Mewika. taso jan ante pi toki pona li tan ma ante mute. mi sona ala e nanpa ni anu ma seme ali.

In general, 'ona' refers back to nouns in a previous sentence, 'ni', as a pronoun, to the prevent sentence or, rather the state of affairs it describes. I think you mean 'ni' throughout your second bit,

'pilin pi wile sona' What did you intend the 'pilin pi' to do. 'mi wile sona e ni:' means "I want to know/ wonder about this."

jan pi toki pona LI lon ... probably 'ni' again rather than 'ona', which would refer back to 'ma ali' or 'jan pi toki pona'

What Mato said about 'o'

[majika]

toki! thanks again guys, very good points.. I'll edit my original post with your corrections.

oh yep. I think when I was writing "mi pilin pi wile e sona e ni", in my mind i was distancing myself from "I want to know if.." towards a gentler "I wonder if.." - but I agree it's not a very valid TP distinction.

//majika

[janMato]

in my mind i was distancing myself from "I want to know if.." towards a gentler "I wonder if.." - but I agree it's not a very valid TP distinction.

toki pona is all about not making distinctions. It's a feature of the language I fight against. I suspect eventually some clever toki ponist will be able to make all the distinctions they want, but for most of the tp community, you get to this wall where it gets to hard to make further distinctions that can be easily read by anyone else.

mi wile sona e ni: I want to know this. (But I also, I need to, I have to, etc)
kin ala la mi wile sona e ni: I don't especially want to know this:

[janKipo]

'kin ala la' ought to mean something like "by the way" (not moreover or in addition, so off to the side) To be sure, it is hard to say -- unambiguously -- that you couldn't care less about something: both 'wile ala sona' and 'ken sona ala' (especially the second) have a whole range of other meanings, which might leave the indifference gone: maybe 'mi ken sona anu sona ala e ni' - no strong force is driving you to either choice.
The point finally is that 'wile' means that some force is driving to the choice or object in question; all that is let out is the nature of the force: desire, necessity, law, peer pressure, etc. etc. (and dually for 'ken' no strong force against it)/