An easy way to see it without difficult grammar explanations, is trying to invert the sentence and see if it works and means the same that way: Mi manĝas pano = I eat bread... right? but how about Pano manĝas mi? who is eating who here? here's where the helpful -n comes to rescue. It doesn't matter how you structure the sentence. The eaten one will be then with the -n: Mi manĝas panon = I eat (a) bread Min manĝas pano = Me, a bread eats. (obviously this is too complicated to use) Panon manĝas mi = Bread I eat ( like Yoda ) Pano manĝas min = A bread is eating me! I am horrible at grammar but I believe you just need to understand why some things are used to start using them. Hope I helped!

I think Panon is the direct object since -n was added to the end. I'm still trying to figure out when to apply it to certain words and when to not do it

reported

I have different keyboard. You can set yours to esperanto. But remember to switch it to English when needed.

If you were studying here to learn English, or wanting to improve your English through this course, then "We eat a bread at the cafe" should be wrong.

• "a bread" is never used in modern English - it's a difficult inconsistent language, I know. (It's one of those strange exceptions, like the plural of sheep being sheep.)

You can have "a loaf of bread" or "a piece of bread" or "a slice of bread" or simply (most commonly used) just "bread", but never "a bread".

• If "a bread" was correct, you wouldn't be able to regularly eat the single of a bread, anyway. It would be "bread" then.

You want: "we are eating bread at the cafe" or "we eat bread at the cafe".

However, on reflection, this is not an English course, and "a" applies to almost every other English word in this manner, & in Esperanto the "a" for nouns is implied - so I'd say you have found a good translation for the meaning in Esperanto.

'in the cafe' is perfectly acceptable, because you are 'in' the building. Especially as 'ĉe' (?) is yet to be learnt on this course.

It's improper English. If you're discussing food in a quantitative amount, then you must have a. If it's in an abstract amount, you must not use a. Examples of quantitative amounts of food would be things like "a bar of chocolate," "a slice of pizza," and "a juice box." (You can take out the of and put the food behind the amount; 'I eat a chocolate bar.') Examples of non quantitative amounts of food would be just the noun - "I eat chocolate," "I eat pizza," and "I drink juice." Hope i helped! :)

The "do" is unneeded, so all it does is add emphasis, implying someone denied that you eat bread in the café. Basically, here are two situations with and without do in their correct usages:

Without do: "Do you eat bread in the café?" "Yeah, we eat bread in the café every day"

With do: "You do not eat bread in the café." "We do eat bread in the café, actually."

Always the second to last syllable.

Don't really understand this - the bread is the object, what is the cafe? Why wouldn't it be

Ni manĝas pano en la kafejon.

d'accord

It has to be in the accusative, panon. When you have a subject acting on the direct object via a transitive verb, you indicate that object with the accusative -n ending. It allows you to rearrange the word order.

Put simply English uses Subject-Verb-Object word order, but since you can have different word orders in Esperanto, you need to id them. They use -n on the Direct Object (the word the verb acts on) to do this.