Nathaniel:
> {zo .tim. cmene mi} is the same assertion as {mi'e .tim.}.
Careful. While they might refer to the same facts, "mi'e" has a second, very important purpose. It assigns the value of "mi". It's the first-person equivalent of "doi". It says, "This is the one who is talking. >From now on, when I say, "mi", that's who it is".
> In terms of emphasis, one might suppose that {zo .tim. cmene mi} is closer to "Tim is my name", rather than "I'm Tim".
> The word {mi'e} implies the subject {mi}, so it cannot be used to give the names of other people. I'm not completely sure whether {mi'e >.djein. .e .tim.} is correct, but I suspect not, since the equivalent {mi se cmene zo .djein. .e .tim.} (I guess the equivalent could be {mi se
> cmene lu .djein. .e .tim. li'u}, which is not grammatically wrong but doesn't mean what you want).
You could say "mi'e [lu'o] la djein joi la tim". I'm not sure if the lu'o is necessary or not (it's not from a grammatical standpoint, but I'm not sure how/if the meaning changes with/without it).
--gejyspa