Can Esperanto omit accusative -n for style? For an ordinary expressed object noun, adjective, personal pronoun, or eligible correlative, the neutral standard answer is no. Mi legis la raporton requires raporton even when SVO order makes the meaning obvious. Casual speed, poetic rhythm, and English-like order do not by themselves suspend case marking.
Yet standard sentences do contain objects without a visible -n. Sometimes the entire object is omitted; sometimes the object is a word that cannot take -n; sometimes a foreign name follows special conventions; and sometimes an apparently “unmarked adjective” is actually a predicative complement. This page separates those legitimate absences from genuine nonstandard loss.
Case ending omitted, or object omitted?
When a recoverable or irrelevant object is left unspoken, no case ending is missing because there is no overt object phrase:
— Ĉu vi jam manĝis? — Jes, mi manĝis antaŭ unu horo.
— Have you eaten yet? — Yes, I ate an hour ago.
Manĝi can take an object, but this exchange presents eating as an activity. It does not contain an unmarked hidden noun. This is standard object ellipsis, covered fully in object ellipsis.
If part of the object phrase remains, that visible remnant still takes -n:
El la du manteloj mi elektis la pli varman.
Of the two coats, I chose the warmer one.
The noun mantelon is understood after la pli varman, but the adjective still occupies an object phrase. Dropping its -n would be nonstandard, not elegant ellipsis.
Objects whose form cannot show -n
Several standard object types are morphologically invariable. Their object role must be recovered from valency, context, and normally clear order:
| Object type | Example | Why no -n |
|---|---|---|
| ambaŭ | Mi invitis ambaŭ. | ambaŭ never takes -n |
| infinitive | Mi volas ripozi. | an infinitive cannot take -n |
| ke-clause | Mi scias, ke ŝi venos. | a clause has no case ending |
| quotation | Li diris “ne”. | quoted material retains its form |
| certain quantity words | Mi manĝis sufiĉe. | the quantity word is invariable |
Mi invitis ambaŭ, sed venis nur unu.
I invited both, but only one came.
Ni eksciis, ke la trajno malfruos.
We found out that the train would be late.
No stylistic permission has deleted an ending here. The object is expressed by material to which the ending cannot attach. Invented forms such as ambaŭn are not standard repairs; use context and a clear order.
Foreign names are a real area of accepted variation
Unadapted foreign names may be left without -n, especially when their shape does not fit Esperanto endings. PMEG records this as accepted usage:
Elizabeto renkontis Peter ĉe la enirejo.
Elizabeto met Peter at the entrance.
Neutral SVO and context identify Peter as object. Where ambiguity is possible, marking or rewriting is better. A vowel-final name can often take -n directly:
Ĉu vi jam konas Annan?
Do you already know Anna?
Speakers may also use an Esperanto ending or a hyphenated ending where appropriate, or put a role-bearing noun before the name:
Mi intervjuis la verkiston Alex Chen post la prelego.
I interviewed the writer Alex Chen after the lecture.
La verkiston carries the object marking; Alex Chen identifies which writer and remains unchanged. This convention is bounded to names and other foreign material. It does not license Mi intervjuis la verkisto.
Predicatives are not objects with “omitted agreement”
An adjective after an object may describe a resulting or judged state through the verb. Such a predicative complement normally has no -n:
La komitato konsideris la proponon nepraktika.
The committee considered the proposal impractical.
La proponon is the object. Nepraktika tells what the committee considered it to be; it is not an adjective inside the same noun phrase. Compare the attributive structure:
La komitato malakceptis la nepraktikan proponon.
The committee rejected the impractical proposal.
Here nepraktikan directly modifies proponon and must agree. With some state descriptions, usage varies between an unmarked predicative and an accusative form meaning “when/as [object] was in that state.” That accepted nuance is not wholesale optionality. The neutral learner recommendation is to keep result and judgment predicatives unmarked and direct modifiers fully agreeing.
Apposition normally repeats the case
An apposition restates the same participant as a separate phrase and normally has the same role marker:
Mi renkontis Karlon, mian malnovan instruiston, en la biblioteko.
I met Karlo, my former teacher, in the library.
Both Karlon and mian malnovan instruiston are object expressions for the same person. The comma and pause signal apposition; they do not license loss of -n. By contrast, an identifying name after a title normally stays unmarked: Mi renkontis profesoron Karlo Novak.
Long lists can make repeated endings feel heavy, but standard style does not simply delete them:
Ni dungis tri specialistojn: tradukiston, programiston kaj grafikiston.
We hired three specialists: a translator, a programmer, and a graphic designer.
Every list item is appositional to an object and therefore takes -n. To avoid repetition, recast the structure: Ĉe ni eklaboris tri specialistoj: tradukisto, programisto kaj grafikisto. Now the list is attached to a subject and legitimately has no -n.
What genuine nonstandard loss looks like
If an ordinary, fully Esperanto noun phrase is a direct object, leaving off -n is a grammatical error in the neutral standard even when context remains understandable:
❌ Mi legis la nova raporto hieraŭ.
Nonstandard — an expressed Esperanto object phrase has lost its case marking.
✅ Mi legis la novan raporton hieraŭ.
I read the new report yesterday.
Such loss is frequent in learner speech and may appear in hurried messages or contact-influenced usage. Attestation does not by itself make a form standard. It reduces the very role contrast that permits Esperanto’s flexible order:
❌ La instruisto laŭdis la lernanto.
Nonstandard and potentially misleading — the intended object lacks -n.
✅ La instruisto laŭdis la lernanton.
The teacher praised the student.
If both noun phrases are unmarked, neutral SVO may suggest the intended reading, but fronting or a more complex context can overturn that guess. Standard -n is not redundant decoration; it is the grammatical signal.
Deliberate omission in a poem, song, slogan, or social-media post remains a nonstandard literary device unless it falls into one of the legitimate categories above. Esperanto’s permitted poetic apostrophe can omit final noun -o in restricted contexts, but it is not a general device for deleting accusative -n.
Na and other attempted repairs
Some speakers experiment with the unofficial object preposition na, especially before names that resist endings. It is experimental and nonstandard, not part of foundational or generally recommended Esperanto. It should not be used as a reason to abandon -n elsewhere.
For broad international comprehension, use ordinary -n, a natural unadapted-name construction, or a rewrite. A sentence that requires readers to know a niche reform is less accessible than one using the established system.
Direction and measure are not optional objects
The ending -n also marks direction and measure. Its legitimate absence depends on choosing another standard construction, not on dropping it stylistically:
Ni marŝis dek kilometrojn ĝis la vilaĝo.
We walked ten kilometers as far as the village.
The extent phrase takes -n. An equivalent dum-phrase for duration or an al-phrase for direction may use base forms because the preposition marks the role. But Ni marŝis dek kilometroj is not a standard stylistic shortening.
Post la kunveno ŝi iris hejmen.
After the meeting she went home.
Directional hejmen contrasts with static hejme. Omitting -n changes “toward home” to “at home”; it is not merely a casual pronunciation variant.
Norm, accepted variation, and evidence
The Fundamento establishes -n as the regular object and directional ending. PMEG distinguishes objects incapable of taking the ending, accepted treatment of foreign names, true ellipsis, and predicative complements from ordinary marked objects. Corpus evidence shows all of these standard patterns—and also learner or editorial errors. A corpus records usage; it does not erase the norm/variation distinction.
The safest pedagogical rule is precise: mark every eligible expressed object word; omit the whole phrase only when discourse licenses ellipsis; and treat foreign names or invariable forms by their specific conventions. Label deliberate case loss honestly as nonstandard rather than presenting it as informal grammar.
Common Mistakes
1. Calling missing object marking “casual style.”
❌ Mi aĉetis nova komputilo.
Incorrect — casual context does not suspend case agreement.
✅ Mi aĉetis novan komputilon.
I bought a new computer.
2. Dropping -n from an adjective left by noun ellipsis.
❌ Mi ne volas la grandan tason; donu al mi la malgranda.
Incorrect — the remaining adjective stands for the object cup.
✅ Mi ne volas la grandan tason; donu al mi la malgrandan.
I don't want the large cup; give me the small one.
3. Extending the foreign-name exception to an Esperanto title.
❌ Mi renkontis la verkisto Alex Chen.
Incorrect — the Esperanto role noun must take -n.
✅ Mi renkontis la verkiston Alex Chen.
I met the writer Alex Chen.
4. Treating an apposition as unmarked commentary.
❌ Mi vizitis Gdanskon, bela havenurbo.
Incorrect — the apposition restates an object and shares its case.
✅ Mi vizitis Gdanskon, belan havenurbon.
I visited Gdańsk, a beautiful port city.
5. Adding -n where an ordinary preposition already marks the role.
❌ Mi legis pri la novan projekton.
Incorrect — pri governs the base noun phrase.
✅ Mi legis pri la nova projekto.
I read about the new project.
Key Takeaways
- Ordinary expressed Esperanto objects do not lose -n merely for informality, rhythm, or obvious SVO order.
- Whole-object ellipsis is standard; a visible adjectival or pronominal remnant still takes object marking.
- Invariable objects and some unadapted foreign names legitimately show no visible -n.
- Predicative complements are separate roles, not objects with omitted agreement.
- Appositions normally repeat case; long lists should be recast rather than stripped of their endings.
- Attested learner loss and experimental na are not neutral standard Esperanto.
Related Topics
- Object EllipsisB2 — When Esperanto may leave an object unspoken, when a visible substitute still needs accusative marking, and when omission becomes unclear.
- Adjective Agreement in the AccusativeA1 — Learn when Esperanto adjectives copy the accusative -n, how -ajn is built, and why predicative adjectives normally remain without -n.
- Predicative Complements and the AccusativeB1 — Distinguish Esperanto predicative complements from accusative objects and attributive modifiers, especially in clauses that describe an object.
- Foreign Names in EsperantoA2 — How to choose among full adaptation, partial adaptation, and original spelling while keeping names recognizable and usable.
- AppositionA1 — How a second noun phrase renames the same referent, matches its case, and differs from an identifying name or predicate complement.
- Missing Accusative -NA2 — Diagnose and repair missing object marking by identifying the verb's participant roles instead of relying on English word order.