Sounds like I need to acquire myself a copy of pu 
If you can explain the difference between "mi moku" (I am food) and "mi moku" (I eat) then this sounds like a pretty good theory to me, cf. the thing I said about finding the moku0c1 thing messy.
However, I must object to this definition of "transitive" which does not require a verb to take any objects in order for the sentence to be grammatical! I don't necessarily object to the theory, but if you call the verb "transitive" you need to postulate how it gets its object when there is none explicitly provided. This is how transitive verbs behave in loglang spaces, and it leads to the problem of underfilling and I swear, if underfilling is haunting me all the way into toki pona...