La loka mapo estas utila por ni.

The local map is useful for us.

Breakdown of La loka mapo estas utila por ni.

• esti: to be
• por: for
• ni: us
• utila: useful
• mapo: the map
• loka: local

Questions & Answers about La loka mapo estas utila por ni.

What does each word in La loka mapo estas utila por ni correspond to in English grammar terms?

• La – the (definite article)
• loka – local (adjective modifying mapo)
• mapo – map (noun, singular)
• estas – is (present tense of esti = to be)
• utila – useful (adjective, predicate complement of mapo)
• por – for (preposition)
• ni – we / us (personal pronoun; here it means us)

Why do we use la here? Could we say Loka mapo estas utila por ni without it?

• La marks that you are talking about a specific map: the local map (probably one both speaker and listener know about).
• Without la (Loka mapo estas utila por ni), it would mean something like “A local map is useful for us” in a more general sense.

So both are grammatically correct; la just makes it definite rather than general.

Why is it loka mapo and not mapo loka? Does the adjective have to go before the noun?

In Esperanto, adjectives can go before or after the noun:

• loka mapo
• mapo loka

Both are grammatically correct.

However, the normal, most common order in everyday prose is adjective + noun (loka mapo). Noun + adjective is used sometimes for style, rhythm, or emphasis, but is less neutral.

Why is it loka mapo and not lokan mapon? When do we add -n?

The -n ending marks the accusative case (direct object, or some special uses of direction).

• Here, mapo is the subject of the sentence, not an object, so it stays as mapo (no -n).
• The adjective loka agrees with mapo, so it also has no -n: loka mapo.

If it were an object, you would see:

• Ni aĉetis la lokan mapon. – We bought the local map.
  
  • lokan mapon = adjective + noun, both with -n because they form the direct object.

Why doesn’t ni have -n (why not nin) after por?

In Esperanto, nouns and pronouns after most prepositions do not take -n, unless you are specifically indicating motion toward something with certain prepositions.

• por ni – for us (no motion, just the normal object of a preposition)

The -n form nin is used when ni is the direct object (no preposition):

• Li helpas nin. – He helps us.

So here, por ni is correct; por nin would be wrong.

Why is it estas utila and not estas utile or estas utilo?

• utila is an adjective = useful.
• utile is an adverb = usefully.
• utilo is a noun = a usefulness / a utility.

After estas (when describing a noun), Esperanto normally uses an adjective:

• La loka mapo estas utila. – The local map is useful.

Using estas utile would mean something like “is in a useful way”, which doesn’t fit this structure.
Using estas utilo would be “is a usefulness”, which is odd and not the intended meaning.

Could we say La loka mapo utilas por ni instead of estas utila por ni?

Yes, La loka mapo utilas por ni is grammatically correct.

• utilas treats “to be useful” as a full verb.
• estas utila uses “to be” + adjective, like in English.

Both mean essentially the same thing.
Style-wise, estas utila is a bit more common and neutral; utilas is slightly more compact and can feel a bit more “constructed” or bookish, but it’s perfectly good Esperanto.

Could we use al ni instead of por ni? What is the difference?

Both are possible, but they have slightly different nuances:

• utila por ni – useful for us, for our purposes / benefit
• utila al ni – useful to us, more like beneficial to us as people

In practice:

• La loka mapo estas utila por ni. – focuses on the map being useful for our needs or tasks.
• La loka mapo estas utila al ni. – a bit more like is of use to us.

Most learners are taught and most often see “utila por …”, but “utila al …” is also correct.

Why doesn’t utila change its form depending on the subject? Shouldn’t it change for person or gender?

In Esperanto, adjectives do not change for:

• person (I / you / he / she, etc.)
• grammatical gender (Esperanto has no grammatical gender like in many European languages)

They only change for:

• number: singular utila, plural utilaj
• case: accusative gets -n → utilan, utilajn

Here, the subject is singular and nominative (mapo), so the form utila is used.

How would the sentence change if there were several local maps?

You would make both the noun and its adjective plural with -j, and keep the rest the same:

• La lokaj mapoj estas utilaj por ni.
  
  • lokaj – plural adjective
  • mapoj – plural noun
  • utilaj – plural predicate adjective agreeing with mapoj

Everything that describes the plural noun mapoj takes -j.

Is the word order fixed, or can we move parts of the sentence around?

Esperanto has fairly flexible word order. The standard one here is:

• La loka mapo estas utila por ni.

You could also say:

• Por ni la loka mapo estas utila.
• La loka mapo, por ni, estas utila. (with pauses in speech / commas in writing)

These versions are still clear and correct. The neutral, most common choice is the original order, but moving por ni for emphasis or stylistic reasons is normal.