I know, that adverbs don't take the accusative, that's what I meant by 'it's not even a noun'. It's just unlogical that this sentence doesn't have an accusative marker, because Esperanto is supposed to be logical. The more I learn in this Esperanto course, the more I understand, that Esperanto has some weird mistakes.
Perhaps different people think different things are logical :)
However, just in case: if you do find points in Esperanto that you wish worked differently, please do not campaign to get them changed, under the premise that they are mistakes which can and should be "fixed".
Esperanto is not going to change (majorly).
There have been many reform proposals in the past (the biggest is Ido), so if you start getting frustrated with "mistakes" in Esperanto, you may be happier with one of those proposals (many of them did start, after all, with the premise that they were improving perceived flaws, so if you consider the same things flaws then the improved version may be more to your liking), or with making your own Esperantido (descendant of Esperanto).
Yes, I know about Esperantidoj. But none of them are as popular as Esperanto. You have to admit, that this sentence really should work differently. Isn't 'multe' in this sentence the actual noun? I do know that it's an adverb, but don't only nouns can be 'of' something? I don't know any English nor German sentences, where an adverb is 'before' a preposition. Adverbs belong to verbs, so 'multe' should mean 'often' and not 'many'. I don't wanna fight, I just wanna understand why this sentence works like this.
Yeah, but I think this is somewhat grammatically messed up. The preposition "da" makes of "tomatoj" a noun complement, ok, but then "multe" should not be an adverb, but a noun which is the direct object of "mendas", so it should be "multon da tomatoj". The way it is written, I don't know how to analyse syntactically. There is no direct object. There is only a huge adverbial adjunct verbal phrase to complement the verb. So is "mendas" an intransitive verb??????
Because if the women had ordered the man, it would have been "La viron mendis multe da virinoj", with the accusative on "la viron" :)
On the other hand, a sentence such as "Multe da viroj mendis multe da virinoj" would indeed be ambiguous.
Most would interpret it as the many men doing the ordering and the many women being ordered, since subject-verb-object word order is common in Esperanto and deliberately using another word order without cases to help clarify the meaning would seem to be deliberately being confusing for the sake of it, rather than desiring to communicate clearly. So, grammatically possible but pragmatically bad.
multe is an adverb, a bit like "a lot" in English: Li multe ternis "He sneezed a lot".
You can't connect an adverb directly to a noun, but you can connect them with a preposition: "He bought a lot of potatoes", Li aĉetis multe da terpomoj.
Or you can use the adjective multa "much; (in plural:) many". This will have to agree with the noun in number and case, e.g. Multaj viroj vidas multajn infanojn "Many men see many children".
I don't see the translation "I mend" for Mi mendas on Google Translate -- for me, it turns mi mendas into "I'm hanging" and Mi mendas into "I'm writing".
At any rate, all three are wrong.
mendi is to order as in to ask for something to be delivered or produced in exchange for money (as in this sentence, or to order clothes from a catalogue, or order a cup of coffee).
ordoni is to order as in to give a command.
Two different senses of "order" -- 40 and 37, respectively, of http://www.dictionary.com/browse/order .