Lernejo can also mean other "learning places" such as University, academies and so on?
No. "Lernejo" is generally understood to be basic education for children.
I think the point BGXCB is trying to make is also a philosophical one.
Esperanto is supposed to be a constructed language with a small number of rules, it's supposed to make sense, not deviate into the meanders natural languages have found. If lernejo is literally lerno + -ej- and -ej- is place, then lernejo must be a place of learning, in English that's a school.
The fact that a subset of Esperantists (or even all of them for that matter) understand primary school or middle school is an alteration of the original meaning, here it's a synecdoche (you're using a broad word meaning school to qualify a more restricted idea). By restricting the meaning of lernejo, you also restrict the meaning of any compound word that could spawn out of it.
A primary school could be a knablernejo or a junlernejo. A church (so a place of worship for Christians) could be kristanpreĝejo.
There is no point in using a constructed language if it's to make it veer away from its original flexibility, otherwise Esperanto will become as convoluted as natural languages are, over time.
One could discuss endlessly about what the point is.
If you want to learn Esperanto, I can help you.
Is there a difference between generally understood, and how the language works? It is generally understood, at least here, that pregxejo means church. However church is actually kirko, and pregxejo is the generic term for place of worship. Perhaps we have the same situation here, where lernejo is actually the generic term for place of learning, and school is really something more specific, perhaps skolo?
Are you asking or telling?
When I say "generally understood", I basically mean that this is how Esperanto works. If you would like me to explain to you in more detail, I can.
Church is not "actually kirko. The word you will hear and which people will understand is pregxejo. The word kirko exists but is almost never used.
The word "lernejo" means k-12 school. Higher education would be universitato or some kind of altlernejo.
Skolo but it's it's more like "school of thought" and does not refer to a place of learning.
How esperanto works? Is how it works and how it is used necessarily the same?
Lerni means to learn, "ej" means location, lernejo means a place to learn? Is that not how the language works?
In english "school" can loosely mean basic education, or contextually it can mean whatever learning institution we are currently discussing, or it can be used as the general term for any learning institution. It seems lernejo fills this role, using the general term to cover the most common use or the current use. However, just like english, there seems to be specific ways to describe the various schools, including bazlernejo and liceo (wiki reference, not sure of accuracy?).
I understand your common usage point, however I think you are incorrect in your assessment of lernejo as an apt word for any learning institution.
Pablussky asked a question - whether lernejo refers in general to any place of learning. The answer to that question is no. Any fluent Esperanto speaker will understand an expression like kiam mi estis en la lernejo to refer to the years before "mi" came of age and started higher education.
I might be misunderstanding your messages here, but it sounds to me like you're arguing with me over the matter. I'm here to answer questions about Esperanto. I realize you probably don't know me, but there are tons of questions on this site that need answers. I will invite you to look into my history a little bit and decide for yourself whether you're willing to take my word on these sorts of things. It would save me a lot of time which I could be using to answer other questions.
I would expect "young persons need to go to school" to be an appropriate translation, is rejected though. Does it feel unnatural to English speakers? If not, please report.
That's fine. I said "youths", also perfectly fine, and got marked wrong. There are a LOT of awkward translations in this lesson.
Except that's almost exclusively used as "the youth", as in, "The youth of today don't know how good they have it. We had to trudge five miles to school at five every morning!"
It's not exactly wrong, but "persons" is almost never used outside of a legal context, so I wouldn't expect it to be accepted.
Where I'm from, one would never count "one person, two persons, three persons..." With the exception of school administrators, for some reason. Used to hear "any persons involved in the incident will be expelled" type of messages over the intercom all the time. Strangega!
As other said, it's not wrong. But most native speakers instead use "people" when referring to more than one person. So you could say that, practically speaking, people is the plural of person.
devi [verb] -- Ni devas lerni Esperanton.
bezoni [noun] -- Ni bezonas niajn komputilojn.
I said "Young people ought," which was marked incorrect. Does devas not mean ought as well as have to?
"Junuloj" temas pri knaboj aŭ viroj ĉu ne? Laŭ mi, mi tradukus "junuloj" per "young men" ĉar ne estas skribita "gejunuloj". Kion vi opinias?
I need to be careful not to confuse the Portuguese meaning with the similar but different Esperanto meaning. In Portuguese, dever means "should", so "Os jovens devem ir à escola" means "the youths SHOULD go to school, but in Esperanto, it seems to mean "have to" or "need to". What would the the correct way of saying "should" in Esperanto?