La urbo havas la rajton nuligi la festivalon.

La means the. In this sentence, la urbo means the city and refers to a specific city already known from context.

Esperanto uses la much like English uses the. If you said just urbo, that would sound more like a city or city in a very general sense.

So:

• la urbo = the city
• urbo = a city / city depending on context

The -n shows the direct object.

Here, the verb is havas = has, and the thing being had is la rajto = the right. Because the right is the direct object of has, it becomes:

• la rajto → la rajton

So the structure is:

• La urbo = subject
• havas = verb
• la rajton = direct object

This is very common in Esperanto: nouns get -n when they are direct objects.

For the same basic reason: it is the direct object of nuligi.

In the phrase nuligi la festivalon, the action is cancel the festival, and the festival is what gets canceled.

So:

• nuligi = to cancel
• la festivalo = the festival
• la festivalon = the festival as the direct object

Even inside an infinitive phrase, Esperanto still marks the direct object with -n.

Because Esperanto infinitives already include the idea of to.

The ending -i marks the infinitive form:

• nuligi = to cancel
• havi = to have
• esti = to be

So Esperanto does not need a separate word for English to before an infinitive.

It means has the right or has the authority/entitlement to do something.

This is a normal and very understandable expression in Esperanto:

• havi la rajton fari ion = to have the right to do something

So:

• La urbo havas la rajton nuligi la festivalon
  = The city has the right to cancel the festival

It is not strange or overly idiomatic. It is a standard way to express this idea.

Yes. A very common shorter version is:

• La urbo rajtas nuligi la festivalon.

This means essentially the same thing: The city is allowed / has the right to cancel the festival.

The difference is mostly stylistic:

• havas la rajton = slightly more explicit, a bit more formal or emphatic
• rajtas = shorter and very natural

Both are correct.

It works as the object of havas.

You can think of it like this:

• La urbo = the city
• havas = has
• la rajton = the right
• nuligi la festivalon = to cancel the festival

So the city has what?
It has the right.

And what kind of right is it?
The right to cancel the festival.

The infinitive phrase nuligi la festivalon explains what the right is about.

Yes, it can be.

Nuligi literally has the idea of make null, annul, or cancel. It is a good fit for canceling something like an event, agreement, decision, or plan.

Its structure is useful to notice:

• nul- = null / zero / void-related idea
• -ig- = make, cause to become
• -i = infinitive

So nuligi is roughly to make null.

In many contexts, that matches English cancel very well.

In a sentence like this, it usually means the city as an authority, so in practice the city government / municipal authorities.

English does the same thing:

• The city canceled the event
• The city has the right to cancel the festival

No one usually thinks the buildings or streets are acting. It means the institution or administration of the city.

So this is a normal kind of shorthand in Esperanto too.

Because Esperanto often uses a straightforward subject–verb–object order, especially in simple statements.

Here the order is:

• La urbo = subject
• havas = verb
• la rajton = object
• nuligi la festivalon = infinitive phrase modifying rajton

This makes the sentence easy for English speakers.

Esperanto can allow more flexibility in word order than English, especially because of endings like -n, but the most neutral order is often quite similar to English.

Usually, no—not if you want the same meaning.

Each la has its own job:

• la urbo = the city
• la rajton = the right
• la festivalon = the festival

If you remove one, the meaning changes or becomes less natural.

For example:

• La urbo havas rajton nuligi la festivalon
  This can be understandable, but it sounds more like has a right to cancel the festival rather than has the right.

• La urbo havas la rajton nuligi festivalon
  This sounds more like to cancel a festival in general, not a specific festival.

So the repeated la is normal and meaningful.

Because Esperanto often uses the bare infinitive after nouns like rajto.

English says:

• the right to cancel

Esperanto says:

• la rajto nuligi

That is a standard pattern. The infinitive directly follows the noun it explains.

So you do not need an extra word equivalent to English to here beyond the infinitive ending -i itself.

A simple pronunciation guide is:

La UR-bo HA-vas la rai-TON nu-LI-gi la fes-ti-VA-lon

A few helpful points:

• u sounds like oo in food
• a sounds like a in father
• e sounds like e in bed (but often a bit clearer)
• i sounds like ee in see
• stress is always on the second-to-last syllable

So:

• UR-bo
• HA-vas
• raj-TON
• nu-LI-gi
• fes-ti-VA-lon

Also, j in Esperanto sounds like English y, but there is no j in this sentence.