Learn Hardcore Esperanto: Post longa tago en la lernejo, ŝi malrapide revenas al la hejmo laca sed feliĉa. - After a long day at school, she slowly returns home tired but happy.

Esperanto has only one article, la, which means the (not a/an).
We omit la here because we are not talking about one specific, previously‑known day, but about a typical/any such day: after a long day at school.

If you said post la longa tago, it would suggest a particular, already‑identified long day, something like after the long day (we already mentioned). That’s a different nuance, so post longa tago is more natural in this general description.

Why is it longa tago and not longan tagon?

In Esperanto, the -n ending (accusative) is used mainly for:

Direct objects: Mi vidas la tagon (I see the day).
Direction (movement toward something) with no preposition: Mi iras hejmen (I go homeward).
Some time expressions: Mi laboris la tutan tagon (I worked the whole day).

But after most prepositions (like post, en, al), you do not add -n, unless you have a special reason (such as showing direction with certain prepositions).

Here, post already clearly shows the relationship (after), so the noun phrase stays in its basic form:

post longa tago ✅
post longan tagon ❌ (ungrammatical in standard usage)

What exactly does en la lernejo express, and could it be just en lernejo?

En la lernejo means in the school / at the school.

en = in / at
la lernejo = the school

Using la normally points to a specific school (often the one she attends). So post longa tago en la lernejo suggests after a long day at (her) school.

If you say en lernejo (without la), it sounds more like in a school / in some school (not specified which). That’s grammatically fine, but usually you mean the known, specific school, so en la lernejo is more natural here.

Why is there a comma after lernejo?

The comma separates the introductory prepositional phrase from the main clause, just as in English:

Post longa tago en la lernejo, (After a long day at school,)
ŝi malrapide revenas al la hejmo laca sed feliĉa. (she slowly returns home, tired but happy.)

This comma is recommended because the opening phrase is fairly long. In very short sentences you might omit such a comma, but here it helps clarity and mirrors typical Esperanto punctuation.

Why does malrapide end with -e instead of -a?

In Esperanto:

-a = adjective ending (describes a noun): rapida tago (a fast/quick day)
-e = adverb ending (describes a verb, adjective, or another adverb): ŝi parolas rapide (she speaks quickly)

Malrapide modifies the verb revenas (how she returns), so it must be an adverb:

ŝi malrapide revenas = she slowly returns

If you incorrectly used malrapida here, it would be an adjective and would not fit grammatically as a modifier of revenas.

What does the prefix mal- in malrapide mean?

Mal- is a very productive prefix in Esperanto meaning the opposite.

rapide = quickly
malrapide = slowly (the opposite of quickly)

Other common examples:

alta (tall, high) → malalta (short, low)
varma (warm) → malvarma (cold)
amiko (friend) → malamiko (enemy)

So malrapide is formed completely regularly: mal- + rapide → malrapide.

Why is revenas used instead of something like reiras or iras reen?

All three are possible in Esperanto, but they have different nuances:

reveni = to return, to come/go back (to where one belongs or started)
reiri = to go back (physically go again in the opposite direction; more literally “to go back”)
iri reen = to go back, to go again (literally go back/again)

In this context, reveni is the most natural, because she is returning home, to her usual place. It focuses on returning to home, not just reversing direction.

You could say:

ŝi reiras hejmen
ŝi iras reen hejmen

but ŝi revenas al la hejmo is the standard and idiomatic way to express she returns home.

Why is it al la hejmo and not something like hejmen? Are both correct?

Both are correct, but they work slightly differently:

al la hejmo = to the home
- al marks direction toward something.
- la hejmo is a noun phrase: the home.
hejmen = home(wards)
- hejmo
  - -n → hejmen, an adverb of direction towards home.

So:

ŝi revenas al la hejmo = she returns to the home
ŝi revenas hejmen = she returns home(ward)

In everyday Esperanto, hejmen is especially common and very natural. Al la hejmo sounds slightly more explicit or literal but is also fully correct.

What is the difference between hejmo and domo?

hejmo = home in the emotional / personal sense (the place where you live and feel at home). It doesn’t have to be a house; it could be an apartment, a room, etc.
domo = house as a physical building.

So:

Mi volas iri hejmen. = I want to go home.
Jen granda domo. = Here is a big house (a large building).

In this sentence, al la hejmo emphasizes that she is going back to her home, not just to a random building.

Why do laca sed feliĉa appear at the end, and why is there no estas?

Laca sed feliĉa describes her state while she is returning:

laca = tired
sed = but
feliĉa = happy

Esperanto allows you to omit estas in such descriptive add‑on phrases, especially after the main clause, like English:

She came home, tired but happy. (English also omits being.)

Similarly:

ŝi malrapide revenas al la hejmo, laca sed feliĉa.

Here, laca sed feliĉa is understood as (being) tired but happy, referring to ŝi.

You could explicitly say:

ŝi malrapide revenas al la hejmo, estante laca sed feliĉa.

but the shorter version without estas/estante is very natural and stylistically better.

Why do laca and feliĉa end with -a instead of -e?

They are adjectives, describing the subject ŝi, not the manner of the action.

laca (tired) and feliĉa (happy) answer “what is she like?”
An adverb in -e would answer “how does she do the action?”

Compare:

ŝi revenas malrapide → She returns slowly (how she returns: adverb)
ŝi revenas laca (or with comma: ŝi revenas, laca) → She returns tired (what she is like: adjective)

So laca sed feliĉa correctly uses -a because it describes her, not the verb revenas.

Do adjectives in this sentence have to agree with the nouns in number and case?

Yes, in Esperanto adjectives must agree with the nouns they describe in both:

number (singular -a, plural -aj)
case (add -n in the accusative if the noun has -n)

In this sentence:

longa tago
- tago is singular, no -n, so longa is also singular, no -n.

If it were plural:

post longaj tagoj = after long days

Or with accusative (e.g. duration of time):

Mi laboris la longan tagon. = I worked the whole long day.
- tagon has -n, so longan also has -n.

Laca sed feliĉa agree with ŝi, which is singular and not in accusative, so they stay laca, feliĉa (not lacaj, feliĉaj, etc.).

Could the word order be changed? For example, can we move laca sed feliĉa or malrapide?

Esperanto word order is fairly flexible, as long as the grammar (endings) remains correct. You can rearrange for emphasis or style. Some acceptable variants:

Post longa tago en la lernejo, laca sed feliĉa ŝi malrapide revenas al la hejmo.
Post longa tago en la lernejo, ŝi revenas al la hejmo malrapide, laca sed feliĉa.
Post longa tago en la lernejo, ŝi, laca sed feliĉa, malrapide revenas al la hejmo.

All of these are understandable. The basic meaning stays the same, but the focus can shift a bit (for example, putting laca sed feliĉa earlier highlights her emotional state more).

What you cannot do is break the grammar—for instance, you can’t change endings or separate parts that must stay together (like splitting malrapide into mal and rapide). But moving entire phrases is usually fine.

Does ŝi always mean a female person? Is there a gender‑neutral option?

Ŝi always means she / her, and refers to a female person.

Traditional Esperanto pronouns:

li = he
ŝi = she
ĝi = it (also sometimes for animals or a person, if their gender is irrelevant in context)
ili = they

For a gender‑neutral singular human, many modern speakers use ri (a widely used but not yet officially recognized pronoun):

ri revenas hejmen. = they (singular) return home.

Others avoid pronouns or use phrases like li aŭ ŝi (he or she). But in this sentence, ŝi clearly indicates that the person is female.

Why is revenas in the present tense? Could it also be revenis?

Revenas is present tense:

ŝi revenas = she returns / is returning

This fits well if we’re describing a habitual action:

After a long day at school, she (usually) slowly returns home, tired but happy.

If you want to talk about one specific day in the past, you would use the past tense revenis:

Post longa tago en la lernejo, ŝi malrapide revenis al la hejmo laca sed feliĉa.
= After a long day at school, she slowly returned home, tired but happy.

So both revenas and revenis are possible; the choice depends on whether you are describing a general routine (present) or a particular completed event (past).