Making Direct Requests | Esperanto Grammar

The most direct Esperanto request uses the volitive ending -u: Atendu, Venu, Ne tuŝu. This form presents an action as wanted rather than as a fact. Whether it sounds like a friendly request, practical instruction, or command depends on the action, relationship, urgency, and surrounding words—not on a separate grammatical “polite imperative.”

The core pattern: verb in -u

An independent -u verb expresses the speaker's will about an action or state. When the understood subject is vi, it is normally omitted. The verb does not change for one or several addressees.

Atendu momenton; mi trovos la ĝustan dosieron.

Wait a moment; I will find the correct file.

Fermu la pordon, ĉar ekstere estas brue.

Close the door, because it is noisy outside.

Infanoj, venu ĉi tien kaj montru al mi viajn desegnaĵojn.

Children, come here and show me your drawings.

The omitted vi is still the semantic subject. An explicit vi can contrast the addressee with someone else or organize turns:

Vi kontrolu la adresojn, kaj mi kontrolos la datojn.

You check the addresses, and I will check the dates.

That explicit contrast is not more polite. It assigns responsibilities. If a third person is the intended actor, name the subject:

Ana venu unue; la aliaj atendu en la koridoro.

Ana should come first; the others should wait in the corridor.

The volitive itself has no tense. Context normally places the desired action after the request, while words such as nun, morgaŭ, or ĝis vendredo locate it.

💡

Think “desired action,” not “second-person verb.” The same -u form works with an omitted vi, an explicit vi, ni, or a named third-person subject.

Negative direct requests

Put ne before the volitive verb: Ne eniru, Ne forgesu, Ne malŝaltu. This requests that the action not occur. It is not English don't plus a separate infinitive.

Ne fermu la fenestron; la farbo ankoraŭ sekiĝas.

Do not close the window; the paint is still drying.

Bonvolu ne sendi la pasvorton per retpoŝto.

Please do not send the password by email.

Ne forgesu kunporti vian identigilon morgaŭ.

Do not forget to bring your identification tomorrow.

Safety instructions often use direct negatives because clarity outranks mitigation (formal): Ne tuŝu, Ne eniru, Ne bloku la elirejon. A reason can improve cooperation when there is time, but an urgent warning should not hide the action inside a long courtesy formula.

Ne transiru la straton — venas buso!

Do not cross the street—a bus is coming!

What makes directness appropriate

A direct request is normally well suited to:

an urgent action;
a routine service step;
a small action among friends or collaborators;
an instruction within an accepted role;
a sequence where permission has already been granted.

Subskribu ĉi tie kaj poste montru vian pasporton ĉe la dua giĉeto.

Sign here and then show your passport at the second counter.

Donu al mi la salon, mi petas.

Pass me the salt, please.

— Ĉu mi povas rigardi la foton? — Kompreneble; prenu mian telefonon.

— May I look at the photo? — Of course; take my phone.

The same grammar can be too forceful when the request is costly, unexpected, or addressed upward in a hierarchy. Sendu al mi la kvindekpaĝan raporton hodiaŭ is clear but may assume authority the speaker does not have. The next page on softening requests and advice develops alternatives.

bonvolu + infinitive

Bonvolu is itself a volitive form of bonvoli. The requested action therefore follows as an infinitive in -i:

Bonvolu atendi ĉe la enirejo.

Please wait at the entrance.

Bonvolu kontroli, ĉu via nomo estas ĝuste skribita.

Please check whether your name is spelled correctly.

Bonvolu ne parki antaŭ la pordego.

Please do not park in front of the gate.

The fixed grammatical frame is bonvolu + infinitive, not two volitives. The historical volu + infinitive is attested but now uncommon (archaic); learners should actively use bonvolu.

Bonvolu is frequent in notices and customer-facing instructions (formal) because it combines courtesy with compactness. In friendly conversation (informal), a bare -u plus warm context may sound more natural than repeating bonvolu.

💡

After bonvolu, look for -i, not -u: bonvolu atendi. With a bare direct request, use -u: atendu.

Sidiĝu, prenu teon kaj rakontu, kiel pasis via vojaĝo.

Sit down, have some tea, and tell me how your journey went.

This welcoming series is direct but not rude. The offered hospitality and relationship determine its force.

Name the request explicitly

The verb peti makes the speech act explicit. A useful full pattern is Mi petas, ke + subject + volitive. The requested subordinate action appears in -u because it remains wanted, not asserted.

Mi petas, ke vi sendu la finan version antaŭ tagmezo.

I ask that you send the final version before noon.

La kuracisto petis, ke mi atendu ankoraŭ unu semajnon.

The doctor asked me to wait one more week.

In face-to-face interaction, parenthetical mi petas can follow a compact request: Unu bileton, mi petas. In a formal letter, Mi petas vin konfirmi... is also used (formal), but the explicit ke-clause is especially transparent for learners.

Mi petas, ke vi konfirmu la ricevitan sumon per mallonga mesaĝo.

I ask that you confirm the amount received with a short message.

Explicit peti does not automatically soften a demand; it labels it. The degree of politeness still depends on burden and context.

Requests versus proposals with ni

Ni + -u is a proposal or exhortation that includes the speaker: Ni komencu, Ni iru, Ni ne diskutu tion nun. In speech the pronoun is normally present because without it the listener may hear a second-person instruction.

Ni komencu per la plej urĝa demando.

Let's begin with the most urgent question.

Ni ne decidu antaŭ ol ĉiuj legis la kontrakton.

Let's not decide before everyone has read the contract.

An interrogative Ĉu ni...? asks for agreement and is often gentler:

Ĉu ni faru dekminutan paŭzon?

Shall we take a ten-minute break?

Do not use inclusive ni to conceal who must actually do the work. A manager saying Ni pretigu la raporton ĝis morgaŭ while assigning it only to one employee can sound evasive. Name roles where they matter.

Sequence multiple actions clearly

For two or three routine steps, coordinate volitives and mark order. For a long procedure, numbered instructions are easier than one enormous sentence. Shared subjects need not be repeated.

Malfermu la formularon, enigu vian retpoŝtadreson kaj alklaku «Sendi».

Open the form, enter your email address, and click ‘Send.’

Objects and complements still follow their ordinary grammar. Direct requests do not suspend accusative marking: malfermu la dosieron, sendu la mesaĝon, demandu la organizanton.

Demandu la organizanton pri la alireblo, ne la hotelon.

Ask the organizer about accessibility, not the hotel.

When a request depends on a condition, state it before the action if it controls the whole instruction:

Se la ruĝa lampo ekbrilos, tuj malŝaltu la aparaton.

If the red light starts flashing, switch off the device immediately.

Make completion and response visible

A request creates an interactional next step: acceptance, refusal, clarification, or completion. The speaker can design the request so that the listener knows what counts as finished. Compare vague Traktu tion with an action plus result and deadline.

Kontrolu la tri sumojn kaj skribu «kontrolite» en la komuna dokumento antaŭ la kvara.

Check the three totals and write ‘checked’ in the shared document before four.

For spoken tasks, a brief acknowledgment prevents duplicated effort:

— Prenu la ŝlosilon ĉe la akceptejo kaj alportu ĝin al la dua etaĝo. — Bone, mi tuj iros.

— Collect the key at reception and bring it to the second floor. — All right, I will go immediately.

If the addressee cannot comply, a direct request does not require a bare ne. A useful refusal states the obstacle and, where possible, an alternative:

Mi ne povas fini tion hodiaŭ, sed mi povas sendi la unuan parton antaŭ la kvina.

I cannot finish that today, but I can send the first part before five.

The requester can explicitly invite clarification: Se io ne estas klara, demandu min. That second direct request increases safety rather than increasing pressure.

Legu la instrukciojn antaŭ ol komenci, kaj se io ne estas klara, demandu min.

Read the instructions before beginning, and if anything is unclear, ask me.

Direct requests in public language

Signs and interfaces often omit interpersonal framing because they address an indefinite stream of users. Premu la verdan butonon, Atendu, and Elektu lingvon are neutral functional instructions (formal). Infinitives also occur as compressed labels, but the volitive gives the learner a complete ordinary clause.

Elektu pagmanieron, kontrolu la sumon kaj poste premu «Konfirmi».

Choose a payment method, check the amount, and then press ‘Confirm.’

Institutional authority does not excuse unclear scope. Ne eniru kun manĝaĵoj might be misread as “do not enter together with food” but is usually clear; Ne kunportu manĝaĵojn en la salonon names the prohibited action more exactly.

Ne kunportu manĝaĵojn aŭ trinkaĵojn en la legejon.

Do not bring food or drinks into the reading room.

Public instructions should also state exceptions positively when possible: Uzu la alian enirejon post la sesa tells users what to do, not only what is forbidden.

Post la sesa uzu la flankan enirejon; la ĉefa pordo estos ŝlosita.

After six, use the side entrance; the main door will be locked.

Tone, punctuation, and channel

An exclamation mark can signal urgency or enthusiasm, but repeated exclamation marks often intensify a request into pressure. A period is normal in written instructions. In text chat, a bare Sendu la dosieron. may appear colder than the speaker intended because voice and shared setting are absent. Add a greeting, time frame, reason, or thanks when the relationship is not obvious.

Saluton, Leo. Sendu al mi la dosieron kiam vi revenos al la oficejo, mi petas. Dankon!

Hello, Leo. Send me the file when you return to the office, please. Thanks!

This remains a direct request; the timing and appreciation simply frame it.

Common Mistakes

Using an infinitive as a standalone command

❌ Fermi la fenestron!

Incorrect as the ordinary direct request; the infinitive does not independently address the listener.

✅ Fermu la fenestron!

Close the window!

Infinitives do occur on public signs as compressed labels (formal), but learners should not generalize that marked style to conversation.

Doubling the volitive after bonvolu

❌ Bonvolu atendu ĉi tie.

Incorrect — bonvolu already carries the volitive ending.

✅ Bonvolu atendi ĉi tie.

Please wait here.

Forgetting the volitive after explicit peti ke

❌ Mi petas, ke vi sendas la adreson.

Incorrect for the requested action — sendas presents it as a fact.

✅ Mi petas, ke vi sendu la adreson.

I ask that you send the address.

Assuming short means rude

❌ Mi devas aldoni longan pardonpeton al ĉiu simpla peto.

Incorrect pragmatic rule — routine low-cost requests can be short and courteous.

✅ Pasigu al mi la akvon, mi petas.

Pass me the water, please.

Key Takeaways

Use -u for a directly desired action, normally omitting an understood vi. Negate it with ne, and keep accusative and complement patterns unchanged. Use bonvolu + infinitive, never bonvolu + -u. Direct requests are entirely appropriate for urgent, routine, small, or role-sanctioned actions; soften them when burden, distance, or uncertainty makes the listener's freedom especially relevant.

Now practice Esperanto

Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.

Start learning Esperanto →