After an ordinary Esperanto preposition, use the pronoun’s basic form: al mi, kun ŝi, por ili, pri vi. Do not add -n merely because English grammar calls “me” or “her” the object of a preposition. Esperanto -n has its own jobs: most often it marks a direct object, and after certain spatial prepositions it can mark movement toward a destination.
This page treats neutral contemporary usage. Two special prepositions, anstataŭ and krom, sometimes combine with an additional role marker; that accepted role-preserving pattern is explained separately below.
The basic pattern
Esperanto has no separate set corresponding to English me, him, her, us, and them after prepositions. The preposition itself shows the relationship, so the unmarked pronoun follows it.
| Person/number | Basic pronoun | Examples after prepositions |
|---|---|---|
| first singular | mi | al mi, kun mi, de mi |
| first plural | ni | por ni, inter ni |
| second person | vi | pri vi, sen vi |
| third singular | li, ŝi, ĝi | ĉe li, kontraŭ ŝi, per ĝi |
| third plural/general | ili, oni | kun ili, pri oni |
| third-person reflexive | si | pri si, apud si |
Ŝi sendis la foton al mi, kaj mi tuj respondis al ŝi.
She sent the photo to me, and I replied to her immediately.
Ĉu vi venos kun ni, aŭ ĉu vi atendos ilin ĉi tie?
Will you come with us, or will you wait for them here?
The contrast kun ni versus atendos ilin is structural. Kun already marks its complement; ilin is the direct object of atendos.
Prepositional form versus direct-object form
Compare a pronoun governed by a preposition with the same referent as a direct object:
Mi parolis kun ŝi post la kunveno.
I spoke with her after the meeting.
Mi renkontis ŝin post la kunveno.
I met her after the meeting.
The ending changes because the syntactic role changes, not because the person is female. The same contrast applies throughout the paradigm: por li/helpi lin, pri ili/mencii ilin, sen vi/ne vidi vin.
Ni ne parolis pri ili, sed ni ja menciis ilin en la raporto.
We didn't talk about them, but we did mention them in the report.
Possessive forms can occur inside the noun phrase following a preposition and agree with that noun phrase:
Mi trovis la dokumenton inter viaj malnovaj dosieroj.
I found the document among your old files.
Here inter governs the entire phrase viaj malnovaj dosieroj. The -j on viaj reflects the plural files; there is no accusative -n.
Reflexive si after a preposition
The basic reflexive form si appears naturally after prepositions when it refers back to a third-person subject in the same clause. This is one of the places where learners actually see si without -n.
Post la intervjuo ŝi iom rakontis pri si.
After the interview, she talked a little about herself.
La infanoj dividis la kukon inter si.
The children divided the cake among themselves.
Li tiris la seĝon al si kaj malfermis la tekkomputilon.
He pulled the chair toward himself and opened the laptop.
First and second person do not use si. They repeat the relevant personal pronoun:
Mi konservis la lastan pecon por mi, ne por vi.
I kept the last piece for myself, not for you.
Por mi can mean either “for me” or “for myself”; context and optional mem supply emphasis. Si is neither an all-person translation of English self nor a subject pronoun. Its antecedent must be third person and local. See The Reflexive Pronoun Si.
Spatial prepositions: position versus destination
With local prepositions such as en, sur, sub, antaŭ, malantaŭ and inter, the absence or presence of -n can express a real semantic contrast:
- basic form: position at a place;
- -n form: movement into or onto that destination.
La ŝlosilo jam estas en ĝi.
The key is already in it.
Metu la rezervan ŝlosilon en ĝin.
Put the spare key into it.
The pronoun ĝi becomes ĝin in the second sentence because the key crosses into the referenced container. This is directional -n, not direct-object marking: the direct object is la rezervan ŝlosilon.
La kato dormis sur ĝi, sed subite saltis de ĝi.
The cat was sleeping on it, but suddenly jumped off it.
La kato saltis sur ĝin kiam ĝi aŭdis la hundon.
The cat jumped onto it when it heard the dog.
Direction away is expressed with de or el, never with directional -n. Thus de ĝi means “from/off it,” while sur ĝin means “onto it.”
Anstataŭ and krom can preserve another role
Anstataŭ “instead of” and krom “apart from/besides” are unusual: they identify replacement or exception/addition without always stating what grammatical role that item would have had. An extra preposition—or occasionally -n—can therefore make the intended parallel explicit.
Petro batis Paŭlon anstataŭ Vilhelmon.
Petro hit Paŭlo instead of Vilhelmo.
Petro batis Paŭlon anstataŭ Vilhelmo.
Petro, rather than Vilhelmo, hit Paŭlo.
This established minimal contrast uses Vilhelmon for the replaced object and Vilhelmo for the replaced subject. With pronouns, the same contrast is possible: anstataŭ min “instead of me as object” versus anstataŭ mi “instead of my doing it / instead of me as subject.” In many ordinary sentences, context makes the bare pattern sufficient.
An extra preposition can disambiguate another relation:
Li faris tion pro ŝi anstataŭ pro mi.
He did that because of her instead of because of me.
If the second pro disappeared, anstataŭ mi could suggest that he acted in my place. Repeating the role marker is a clarity device, not empty redundancy.
With krom, added -n is accepted when it explicitly continues an object role, but it is usually unnecessary. Clear prose often uses surrounding words such as ankaŭ, or repeats the relevant preposition.
Krom ŝi, ankaŭ mi restos ĝis la fino.
Besides her, I too will stay until the end.
Mi ne parolis kun iu krom kun ŝi.
I spoke with no one except her.
These exceptional patterns should not be generalized to ordinary prepositions. Kun ŝin remains wrong.
Recoverable and explicit reference
A bare pronoun is useful only when its referent is recoverable. When two possible antecedents are active, repeat a name or noun phrase instead of trusting li/ŝi/ili.
Marta parolis kun Sofia pri la nova posteno. Poste Marta sendis la formularon al Sofia.
Marta spoke with Sofia about the new position. Later Marta sent the form to Sofia.
Replacing both names in the second sentence with ŝi and ŝi would conceal who sent what to whom. Esperanto pronouns mark grammatical roles efficiently, but they do not automatically resolve two people with the same person, number, and gender features.
Common Mistakes
1. Copying English object case after a preposition
❌ Ŝi venis kun min.
Incorrect — kun already marks the relationship.
✅ Ŝi venis kun mi.
She came with me.
2. Omitting directional -n for a reached destination
❌ Mi metis la karton en ĝi.
Incorrect for the intended meaning 'into it'; without -n, en ĝi describes location.
✅ Mi metis la karton en ĝin.
I put the card into it.
3. Using si for first or second person
❌ Mi aĉetis kafon por si.
Incorrect — si is third-person reflexive.
✅ Mi aĉetis kafon por mi.
I bought coffee for myself.
4. Letting si cross a finite clause boundary
❌ Lea diris, ke mi parolu kun si.
Incorrect if si is intended to mean Lea; inside the ke-clause it cannot refer to the main-clause subject.
✅ Lea diris, ke mi parolu kun ŝi.
Lea said that I should speak with her.
Key Takeaways
- Ordinary preposition + pronoun uses the basic form: al mi, kun ŝi, pri ili, por si.
- A direct object independently takes -n: vidi ŝin, not because English says “her,” but because Esperanto marks the object.
- Local prepositions can take -n for motion into a destination: en ĝi “in it,” en ĝin “into it.”
- Reflexive si works only for a local third-person subject; use mi, ni, vi for first and second person.
- Anstataŭ and krom exceptionally allow extra role marking when it prevents ambiguity.
Related Topics
- Accusative Personal PronounsA1 — Add -n to a personal pronoun when it is a direct object, while leaving pronouns after ordinary prepositions unmarked.
- De-Phrases versus PossessivesB1 — Choose between compact possessive forms such as mia and fuller de-phrases, and avoid ambiguity about ownership, source, and authorship.
- The Reflexive Pronoun SiA1 — Use si and sin when a third-person subject refers back to itself, and distinguish reflexive reference from ordinary third-person pronouns.
- Clause Boundaries for SiA1 — Track si and sia within finite clauses so that reflexive reference stays with the correct local subject.
- No Accusative after Ordinary PrepositionsA1 — Learn why ordinary Esperanto prepositions take unmarked complements and how to distinguish them from directional and exceptional combinations with -n.
- Prepositions with Optional Directional -NA1 — Learn when local Esperanto prepositions combine with directional -n, when they describe a static location, and where accepted variation reflects different viewpoints.