"The girl needs permission to go into the city."

Translation:La knabino bezonas permeson iri en la urbon.

August 12, 2015



Is directional '-n' exempted from the 'after preposition' rule?

December 31, 2015


Laŭ mi, when the proposition is a "directional" type such as "en/in", the "directional -n" can follow the proposition to clarify the action ("in vs into").

August 11, 2017


Why is "por" omitted here?

November 5, 2016


I would like to understand this as well.

August 31, 2017


Volitive in Esperanto is really confusing to me. From other very similar sentences, I would expect "iru" in this case. Can anyone explain why "iri" is better here?

Lernu diras, "Volitiva verbo, verbo kun U-finaĵo, montras, ke la ago aŭ stato ne estas reala, sed dezirata, volata, ordonata aŭ celata."

August 12, 2015


I would write:

"La knabino bezonas permeson por iri en la urbon"

August 12, 2015


Because you only get one main verb in a sentence, (which in this is "needs / bezonas,") and that's the one that gets conjugated. The other is just an infinitive.

In English, the infinitive is "to" + the root, here "to go." In esperanto, that's root + i, here "iri."

So "Ŝi bezonas permeson iri al la urbo."

September 14, 2015


Why is "eniri" wrong here, "La knabino bezonas permeson eniri la urbon"? It was one of the multiple choices, but DL said that only the "iri en" version was correct.

December 26, 2017


I can see why that would be annoying. My guess is that the course authors were making a distinction between "entering" and "going into" a city. I suspect if you reported it, it would be added as an alternative.

December 26, 2017


Thanks. I'll report it next time, assuming I remember to type or choose "eniri".

But ... is there really any distinction in meaning between "entering" and "going into"? "Entering" does seem a bit more formal, but I wouldn't expect the difference between "eniri" and "iri en" to be one of formality.

January 27, 2018
Learn Esperanto in just 5 minutes a day. For free.