Kiam amikoj venas, ili eniras nian hejmon kaj ridetas al mia patrino.

When friends come, they enter our home and smile at my mother.

Breakdown of Kiam amikoj venas, ili eniras nian hejmon kaj ridetas al mia patrino.

• amiko: the friend
• ili: they
• kaj: and
• al: to
• kiam: when
• veni: to come
• mia: my
• nia: our
• hejmo: the home
• patrino: the mother
• rideti: to smile
• eniri: to enter

Questions & Answers about Kiam amikoj venas, ili eniras nian hejmon kaj ridetas al mia patrino.

What exactly does kiam do in this sentence? Is it a question word or something else?

Kiam here is a subordinating conjunction meaning when (in the sense of whenever / at the time that), not a direct question word.

• In direct questions: Kiam vi venos? – When will you come?
• In this sentence it introduces a time clause:
  Kiam amikoj venas, ili eniras nian hejmon… – When friends come, they enter our home…

So kiam works like English when that links two clauses, one describing the time and the other describing what happens then.

Why is it just amikoj and not la amikoj? How do I know if it means friends in general or the friends?

Esperanto has only one definite article, la, and no indefinite article at all.

• amikoj venas can mean:
  • friends come
  • some friends come
  • friends (in general) come
• la amikoj venas means:
  • the friends come (some specific, known group of friends)

In this sentence the idea is general/habitual: whenever friends (not necessarily a fixed group) come, something happens. That is why there is no la. If you wanted to talk about a specific group you have in mind, you would say Kiam la amikoj venas….

All three verbs (venas, eniras, ridetas) are in the present tense. Does that mean this is happening right now?

Not necessarily. In Esperanto, the simple present -as is often used for:

• actions happening now:
  Mi legas. – I am reading.
• habitual or repeated actions (what this sentence shows):
  Kiam amikoj venas, ili eniras nian hejmon… – When friends come, they enter our home… (every time it happens)

If you wanted it clearly in the past or future, you would change all the verbs:

• Past: Kiam amikoj venis, ili eniris nian hejmon kaj ridetis al mia patrino.
• Future: Kiam amikoj venos, ili eniros nian hejmon kaj ridetos al mia patrino.

Why do we suddenly use ili instead of repeating amikoj? Could I leave out ili?

Ili is a third‑person plural pronoun meaning they, and it refers back to amikoj.

• First clause subject: amikoj
• Second clause subject: ili (= those friends)

You could repeat amikoj:

• Kiam amikoj venas, amikoj eniras nian hejmon… – grammatically correct, but repetitive and less natural.

You can also omit the pronoun and keep the subject implicit:

• Kiam amikoj venas, eniras nian hejmon kaj ridetas al mia patrino.

In that case, the subject of eniras and ridetas is still understood to be amikoj. The version with ili is clear and quite natural; all three variants are grammatically fine, but using ili is stylistically smooth.

Why is it nian hejmon and not nia hejmo? What is the -n doing here?

The -n marks the accusative case, mainly used for:

1. Direct objects of verbs.
2. Direction (movement to somewhere) after many prepositions or with bare nouns/adverbs like hejmen.

In nian hejmon:

• hejmon is the direct object of eniras (they enter what? → our home), so it must take -n: hejmo → hejmon.
• nia is a possessive adjective and must agree in case and number with hejmo:
  • nominative: nia hejmo – our home (as subject)
  • accusative: nian hejmon – our home (as object)

So ili eniras nian hejmon literally: they enter our home (with our home as the direct object).

Why do we say eniras nian hejmon instead of using iras en nian hejmon with the preposition en?

Esperanto has two separate options:

1. eniri + direct object

   • eniri nian hejmon – to enter our home
     Here en- is a verb prefix meaning into, and hejmon is the direct object.

2. iri en + accusative

   • iri en nian hejmon – to go into our home
     Here iri = to go, and en is an independent preposition taking a directional accusative.

So:

• eniri nian hejmon = enter our home
• iri en nian hejmon = go into our home

You generally do not add en after eniri (*eniri en nian hejmon), because the en- prefix already carries the into meaning and makes that redundant.

What is the difference between hejmo and domo? Could I say nian domon instead?

Yes, you could say nian domon, but there is a nuance:

• hejmo = home (the place you live in, with a homely/ emotional feel)
• domo = house (the physical building)

So:

• ili eniras nian hejmon – they enter our home (emphasis on it being home)
• ili eniras nian domon – they enter our house (slightly more neutral, building‑focused)

Both are grammatically correct; hejmo better matches the idea of home.

Why is it ridetas and not ridas? What does the -et- mean?

The suffix -et- is a diminutive: it can mean small, slight, gentle, a little.

• ridi – to laugh
• rideti – to smile (literally to laugh a little, but in practice: smile)

So:

• ili ridas = they laugh (audible laughter)
• ili ridetas al mia patrino = they smile at my mother (a gentle, friendly smile)

Ridetas is the right choice here because the meaning is about smiling, not laughing out loud.

Why do we say ridetas al mia patrino and not ridetas mian patrinon?

The natural pattern in Esperanto for smile at someone is:

• rideti al iu – to smile at someone

Here, al means to / towards:

• ridetas al mia patrino – they smile to/towards my mother → they smile at my mother.

Using a direct object:

• ridetas mian patrinon

is grammatically possible but sounds unusual and can suggest a different nuance (more like they smile my mother, where she is a direct object affected by the action). The standard, idiomatic way for a friendly smile directed toward someone is with al.

For related verbs:

• ridi pri iu – to laugh about someone
• ridi je iu (less common) – to laugh at someone (often with a negative, mocking sense)

So rideti al mia patrino sounds positive and polite.

Why is there no la before mia patrino? In some languages you say the my mother.

In Esperanto you normally do not use la with possessive adjectives like mia, via, lia, ŝia, nia, ilia.

• mia patrino – my mother
• via amiko – your friend
• nia hejmo – our home

Adding la (e.g. la mia patrino) is generally unnecessary and sounds odd in standard Esperanto. So al mia patrino is exactly what you want.

Could I change the word order, for example Kiam venas amikoj or move al mia patrino earlier?

Esperanto word order is fairly flexible, but some orders are more neutral and natural.

Your original is very standard:

• Kiam amikoj venas, ili eniras nian hejmon kaj ridetas al mia patrino.

Some acceptable variations:

• Kiam venas amikoj, ili eniras nian hejmon kaj ridetas al mia patrino.
  (Slight emphasis on amikoj coming; still fine.)
• Kiam amikoj venas, ili eniras nian hejmon kaj al mia patrino ridetas.
  (Puts extra emphasis on al mia patrino.)

Unusual but grammatically possible:

• Kiam amikoj venas, nian hejmon ili eniras kaj ridetas al mia patrino.
  (Emphasis on nian hejmon.)

As long as:

• each finite verb has a clear subject, and
• the -n endings and prepositions are correct,

the sentence stays grammatical. The original word order is the most neutral and easiest for learners.

What is the comma doing here? Does Esperanto require a comma before kiam clauses?

The comma separates the subordinate time clause from the main clause:

• Kiam amikoj venas, – subordinate clause
• ili eniras nian hejmon kaj ridetas al mia patrino. – main clause

Esperanto punctuation here is similar to English:

• You normally put a comma when a subordinate clause like kiam … comes before the main clause.
• When the main clause comes first, the comma is often optional:
  Ili eniras nian hejmon kaj ridetas al mia patrino kiam amikoj venas.

So in the given sentence, the comma is standard and helpful for readability.