Malgraŭ tio, ke la sako reuzeblas, neniu uzas ĝin.

It means despite the fact that or although.

So:

• malgraŭ = despite / in spite of
• tio, ke... = the fact that...

Together, malgraŭ tio, ke la sako reuzeblas means despite the fact that the bag can be reused.

A learner should also know that Esperanto often uses kvankam for although, so a very similar sentence could be:

• Kvankam la sako reuzeblas, neniu uzas ĝin.

That is a little more direct, but the original sentence is perfectly normal too.

In malgraŭ tio, ke..., the word tio means that or more naturally the fact. The structure is basically:

• malgraŭ tio = despite that
• ke... = that...

So literally it is something like despite that, that..., but in natural English we say despite the fact that...

This is a common Esperanto pattern. Tio points forward to the whole clause introduced by ke.

Esperanto often uses commas to clearly separate clauses.

Here the structure is:

• Malgraŭ tio, ke la sako reuzeblas, neniu uzas ĝin.

The comma before ke helps mark the beginning of the subordinate clause, and the comma after reuzeblas marks its end before the main clause begins.

In practice, Esperanto punctuation is often a bit more regular and clause-based than English punctuation.

Reuzeblas means can be reused or is reusable.

It is made from several parts:

• re- = again
• uz = use
• -ebl- = able to be / possible to
• -as = present tense

So:

• uzi = to use
• reuzi = to reuse
• reuzebla = reusable
• reuzeblas = is reusable / can be reused

This is a very compact and typical Esperanto way to express the idea.

The suffix -ebl- expresses possibility.

For example:

• manĝebla = edible, able to be eaten
• legebla = readable, able to be read
• videbla = visible, able to be seen

So reuzebla means able to be reused, and reuzeblas means is able to be reused or can be reused.

This is one of the very useful Esperanto affixes, because it lets you build meanings very efficiently.

Because la sako is the subject of reuzeblas.

In Esperanto, the -n ending marks the direct object. But here the bag is not being directly acted on in that clause; it is the thing being described:

• la sako reuzeblas = the bag is reusable / the bag can be reused

So la sako stays in the nominative form, without -n.

By contrast, later in the sentence:

• neniu uzas ĝin

Here ĝin is the direct object of uzas, so it has -n.

Because neniu refers to no person / nobody, while nenio means nothing.

In this sentence:

• neniu uzas ĝin = nobody uses it

That makes sense because the one doing the using would be a person.

Compare:

• neniu venis = nobody came
• nenio okazis = nothing happened

A common mistake for English speakers is mixing up no one and nothing, so this is an important distinction.

Ĝin means it and refers back to la sako.

So:

• neniu uzas ĝin = nobody uses it

The form ĝin has the -n ending because it is the direct object of uzas.

Esperanto often uses pronouns just like English does to avoid repeating the noun:

• la sako ... neniu uzas ĝin
• the bag ... nobody uses it

Because ĝi is the basic pronoun form, while ĝin is the accusative form.

Compare:

• ĝi estas granda = it is big
• mi uzas ĝin = I use it

In your sentence, the bag is what people use, so it is the direct object, which requires -n:

• neniu uzas ĝin

Yes, that is possible.

Both of these are grammatical:

• neniu uzas ĝin
• neniu ĝin uzas

The first is probably the more neutral order. The second can give slightly more focus or emphasis to ĝin.

Esperanto word order is fairly flexible because the grammar endings show the roles of words clearly. Still, the most common neutral order is usually subject–verb–object.

La is the definite article, meaning the.

So la sako means the bag.

In a sentence like this, using la usually suggests a specific bag already known from context, or at least a particular bag being discussed. Without la, sako would sound more like a bag or bag in a more general sense.

Since the English meaning has already been given to the learner, this sentence is probably talking about a particular bag: the bag is reusable, but nobody uses it.

Yes. A very natural alternative is:

• Kvankam la sako reuzeblas, neniu uzas ĝin.

This means the same thing: Although the bag is reusable, nobody uses it.

The difference is mainly stylistic:

• kvankam = although
• malgraŭ tio, ke = despite the fact that

The second is a little more elaborate, but both are correct and common.

They are very close in meaning, but not identical in style.

• la sako reuzeblas = the bag is reusable / can be reused
• oni povas reuzi la sakon = one can reuse the bag / people can reuse the bag

The first describes a property of the bag.
The second describes what people are able to do with it.

In many contexts they mean nearly the same thing, but reuzeblas is more compact and focuses on the bag’s reusability.

The subordinate clause is:

• ke la sako reuzeblas

It depends on malgraŭ tio.

The main clause is:

• neniu uzas ĝin

That is the core statement of the sentence: nobody uses it.

So the full sentence has this structure:

• Despite the fact that X, Y
• Malgraŭ tio, ke X, Y

Here:

• X = la sako reuzeblas
• Y = neniu uzas ĝin

Yes, several things:

1. Esperanto often builds meanings with affixes.
   re-uz-ebl-as is a great example of how much can fit into one word.

2. The accusative matters.
   ĝin has -n because it is the object.

3. Negative correlatives are systematic.
   neniu is part of a whole set:

   • iu = someone
   • ĉiu = everyone
   • neniu = no one

4. Clause punctuation is often very clear.
   Esperanto commonly marks subordinate clauses with commas.

5. Some expressions do not translate word-for-word naturally into English.
   malgraŭ tio, ke is best understood as despite the fact that, not by translating each word too mechanically.