Mi manĝas panon antaŭ ol mi laboras.

I eat bread before I work.

Breakdown of Mi manĝas panon antaŭ ol mi laboras.

• mi: I
• manĝi: to eat
• labori: to work
• antaŭ ol: before

Questions & Answers about Mi manĝas panon antaŭ ol mi laboras.

What does each individual word in Mi manĝas panon antaŭ ol mi laboras mean?

Mi means I. Manĝas is the present tense of manĝi, meaning eat or am eating. Panon is pano (bread) in the accusative case (indicated by the -on ending), showing that it is the direct object of the verb. Antaŭ means before, while ol functions as a conjunction needed to introduce the subordinate clause. The second mi means I again, and laboras is the present tense of labori, meaning work or am working.

Why is panon used with the -on ending instead of simply pano?

In Esperanto, the -on ending marks the accusative case, which indicates the direct object of a verb. Since the bread is what is being eaten, panon is used to show that it is the object receiving the action of manĝas.

How does the phrase antaŭ ol function within this sentence?

Antaŭ ol is a fixed compound conjunction in Esperanto that translates to before. It connects the main clause (Mi manĝas panon) with the subordinate clause (mi laboras), indicating that the action of eating bread comes before the action of working.

Why are both verbs, manĝas and laboras, in the present tense?

Both verbs are in the present tense because Esperanto often uses this tense to describe ongoing, habitual, or general actions. Even though the actions occur sequentially, the present tense is used to express the idea that these actions form part of a routine or are generally true.

How flexible is the word order in Esperanto, and what does the order in this sentence tell us?

Esperanto features a relatively flexible word order because grammatical roles are clearly indicated by word endings, like the accusative -on. However, the conventional subject-verb-object order is commonly used for clarity. In this sentence, the order establishes mi as the subject performing the actions, manĝas as the verb governing the direct object panon, and the phrase antaŭ ol mi laboras as a subordinate clause that sets the temporal sequence.

What would happen if you removed ol after antaŭ in the sentence?

If ol were removed, the sentence would become ungrammatical. The combination antaŭ ol is a fixed expression and both parts are required to correctly introduce the subordinate clause. Without ol, the sentence would not clearly connect the actions, and the meaning of before I work would be lost.