"Yesterday my sister-in-law came to my home."
Translation:Hieraŭ mia bofratino venis al mia hejmo.
7 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
I tried to replace the preposition with the accusative like so: "Hieraŭ mia bofratino venis mian hejmon." But this was marked as incorrect. It seems to me it should be correct. I understand that use of the preposition together with the accusative would generate a different meaning (movement into the house), but as I didn't use both, I thought I had a valid translation.
*al miaN hejmoN is a grammatical impossibility. The accusative is used to signify "motion toward" only with prepositions which by themselves do not signify motion. Like so:
en="in", sur="on". These prepositions by themselves signify location, not motion.
Mi estas en la parko. I am in the park. Li saltas sur la lito. He jumps on the bed.
vs.
Mi iras en la parkoN. I go into the park. Li saltas sur la litoN. He jumps onto the bed.
The verbs of motion (iri, veni, ...) are used intransitively. That means, they don't take a direct object. That probably is to avoid ambiguites like "into my house" vs. "to my house".
Theoretically, just about every preposition can in principle be replaced by an accusative. In practice, this is done only sparingly.
In everyday Esperanto, a sentence like "Ŝi venis mian hejmon" is rare. Some hearers/readers would find it special, others would find it weird.
"Yesterday my sister-in-law came to the my home." Mia hejmo is already not indefinite (in that your house is one specific house), so la would be redundant.