Nu, kion ni faru pri la pluvo?

Nu is a little discourse word, similar to English well, so, or now then. It helps set the tone of the sentence and makes it sound natural in conversation.

So Nu, kion ni faru pri la pluvo? has the feeling of:

• Well, what should we do about the rain?
• So, what do we do about the rain?

It is not grammatically necessary, but it is very common in speech.

Because kion is the direct object of faru.

The basic idea is:

• fari ion = to do something
• Kion ni faru? = What should we do?

In Esperanto, direct objects take -n, so:

• kio = what
• kion = what, as a direct object

Even though kion comes first in the sentence, it is still the object of fari, so it needs -n.

Faru is the volitive form of the verb. It is used for commands, requests, suggestions, and ideas like let’s..., should..., or what are we to do?

Compare:

• ni faras = we do / we are doing
• ni faros = we will do
• ni faru = let us do / we should do / shall we do

In a question like this, ni faru is a very natural way to say what should we do?

Not exactly. With vi, the volitive can sound more directly like a command:

• Faru tion! = Do that!

But with ni, it usually sounds like a suggestion or shared decision:

• Ni iru. = Let’s go.
• Kion ni faru? = What should we do?

So here it does not sound bossy. It sounds like the speaker is including themself in the decision.

Because Esperanto often puts question words first, just like English does.

So:

• Kion ni faru? = What should we do?

This is the normal word order for a question with ki- words.

Also, because Esperanto marks the object with -n, the role of kion is clear even though it comes first.

Pri means about, concerning, or regarding.

So:

• pri la pluvo = about the rain

In this sentence, it tells you what problem or topic the action is related to:

• Kion ni faru pri la pluvo? = What should we do about the rain?

Because pri is a preposition, and in Esperanto prepositions normally do not take the accusative -n.

So:

• pri la pluvo = about the rain

The -n goes on kion because kion is the direct object of fari. But pluvo is inside a prepositional phrase headed by pri, so it stays pluvo, not pluvon.

La is the definite article, meaning the.

Here la pluvo usually means a specific rain situation that both speakers know about, such as the rain that is currently falling or the rainy weather affecting their plans.

Esperanto often uses la in cases where English might also say the rain:

• pri la pluvo = about the rain

Without la, pluvo would sound more general or abstract.

No, that would be incorrect in standard Esperanto.

Because fari takes a direct object, the question word must be in the accusative:

• correct: Kion ni faru?
• incorrect: Kio ni faru?

A good way to remember it is:

• Ni faru ion. = Let’s do something.
• therefore: Kion ni faru? = What should we do?

It is neutral and very natural. It works well in everyday speech.

• Nu makes it conversational.
• kion ni faru is a normal way to ask for a shared decision.
• pri la pluvo is straightforward and natural.

So the whole sentence sounds like ordinary spoken Esperanto, not especially formal or especially slangy.

A simple pronunciation guide is:

• kion ≈ KEE-on
• ni ≈ nee
• faru ≈ FAH-roo

A few helpful points:

• ki is pronounced like kee
• o is always a clear o
• u sounds like oo
• stress in Esperanto is always on the second-to-last syllable

So:

• KI-on? No
• ki-ON? No
• KI-on? Actually the stress is KI-on only if spoken as two syllables ki-on, and since the second-to-last syllable is ki, that is correct.

And for the whole sentence:

• NU, KI-on ni FA-ru pri la PLU-vo?

Yes. That is a very good translation.

Depending on context, Kion ni faru? can match several natural English versions:

• What should we do?
• What shall we do?
• What are we going to do?
  (a looser, more idiomatic translation in some contexts)

The Esperanto form itself is the volitive, so should or shall often captures it well.