"The way home is long."

Translation: La vojo hejmen estas longa.

[Mr.Knight]

Why does "hejme" take the accusative -n in this case?

[vikungen]

Because of motion.

It is the way towards home.

Mi estas hejme = I am at home. (No motion)

Mi iras hejmen = I go home(wards). (Motion.)

[Mr.Knight]

Ugh. I hate that rule. Why can't "al" serve that function?

[Lambchaikies]

Also, "La vojo al hejmo estas longa." is an acceptable translation using "al". Despite being vastly simplified and being extremely regular, Esperanto appears to have similar levels of ambiguity and alternative ways to phrase concepts as English.

Lojban, featuring complete unambiguity (but also being nearly impossible to learn), probably has only exactly one correct way to express the above sentence.

[Oceanotti]

I just tried La vojo al la hejmo estas longa but my answer was rejected. I wonder if it is due to the article. The examples provided by PIV-o, all of them Zamenhof's, make me think that in Esperanto one is supposed to determine which “home” is being talked about, if it is a specific one, so I guess the article is necessary. I wonder if omitting it is correct Esperanto or rather an anglicism. What do you think?

[vikungen]

Because it doesn't.

This way is easier and allows for more flexibility than "al", don't worry, you'll get used to it.

[n2fole00]

Why is home an adverb here?

[WyattSchol]

It ends in e.