"Come with me to the southern coast of France!"
Translation:Venu kun mi al la suda marbordo de Francio!
That is what I thought. I understood that action towards something caused the use of the "n" suffix ( a kind of dative using the accusative form) is that wrong, and if so why?
Accusative, as usual, is the case of the object in the sentence, and uses the suffix "-N". Here we have:
Mi (subject) amas (verb) la sudan mabordon de Francio (object).
So it's pretty straight-forward.
Dative in Esperanto is expressed with the preposition "al" and has no suffix, for example in sentences like:
- Francujo plaĉas al mi .
- Mi donis al li pomon.
There is no dative in this question's sentence.
Mi komprenas, ke ne ĉia bordo estas marbordo... sed ĉia marbordo... estas bordo! Ĉu ne?
Not in this case, as marbordo de Francio needs an adjective, not an adverb denoting motion.
You could say: Venu kun mi suden.
Though not: Venu kun mi suden || marbordo de Francio As this sentence wouldn't be connected in any way.
So in this case it must be: Venu kun mi al la suda marbordo de Francio!
vikungen is right. However, although it doesn't work as a translation of the exercise, you could say "Venu kun mi suden al la marbordo de Francio" and it would be implied that you're going to the southern coast.