La fromagxo estas la mangxo! Bongusta, bongusta fromagxo, mi amas vin.
I prefer: <Mi manĝas la manĝaĵon kun fromaĝo> (the food is with cheese) and: <kaj mi manĝas kune kun ŝi> (I'm with/near her for eat).
Is "I eat a meal with cheese" wrong? It says "my meal" and "the meal" are correct. Is there something I'm missing or should I report it?
"La" translates to "the". Any noun unaccompanied by "la" would have an implied "a/an" when translated to English at least. I have no understanding of why it would accept "my" since "mia" isn't part of the sentence.
It's more of a loose translation. It's usually more natural to say you eat your food than 'the' food in English. Other languages may differ with this.
No, -n is reserved for the accusative case and indicating direction. Prepositions therefore never take -n unless they indicate direction, which is not the case here.
I would say in English I ate cheese with the meal if I have for instance a few cheese cubes with my sandwich chips and coke Zero.
If however I was going to eat cheese, then I would say "I ate cheese FOR the meal"
I would not say I ate the meal with cheese.
But in Esperanto this is the correct normal usage? Or is this just an unfortunate example.
Does this mean that I am eating a cheesy meal (Kraft dinner) or that I am eating some cheese with my meal?
So in English, with can have two different meanings. "I eat the meal with cheese," and "I eat the meal with them." It seems like Esperanto doesn't distinguish the different meanings either? So I could be eating a meal with Cheese as my dinner date as well as I can be eating the meal with them being in the meal? Lol
Yes. Language is not math. Context and semantics matter.
At least in Esperanto there's no confusion with "I eat the meal with a fork" since we use a different word for "with" there (per.)