En la kafejo mia amikino uzas la interreton, dum mi legas libron.

In the café my (female) friend uses the internet, while I read a book.

Breakdown of En la kafejo mia amikino uzas la interreton, dum mi legas libron.

• mi: I
• amiko: the friend
• libro: the book
• la: the
• en: in
• uzi: to use
• mia: my
• legi: to read
• dum: while
• kafejo: the café
• interreto: the internet

Questions & Answers about En la kafejo mia amikino uzas la interreton, dum mi legas libron.

Why is it en la kafejo and not en kafejo? Do I always need la with places like this?

Both en la kafejo and en kafejo are grammatically correct, but they differ slightly in meaning:

• en la kafejo = in the café, a specific café that you and the listener probably know or have in mind.
• en kafejo = in a café, some café in general, not specified which one.

So you don’t always need la with places. Use la when you mean a specific, known place; leave it out when you mean any / some place of that kind, or you’re being non‑specific.

What does kafejo mean exactly, and how is it formed from kafo?

Esperanto uses the suffix -ej- to mean “a place where X happens / where X is done”.

• kafo = coffee
• kafejo = a place connected with coffee → a café, coffee shop

Some other examples of -ej-:

• lern-ejo (from lerni, to learn) → place for learning → school
• preĝ-ejo (from preĝi, to pray) → place for praying → place of worship
• banejo (from bani, to bathe) → place for bathing → bathroom / bathhouse

So kafejo is not “coffee” itself; it is the place associated with coffee.

Why is it en la kafejo and not en la kafejon? When do I add -n to a place?

The -n ending (accusative) is not used for a simple location; it’s used for:

1. Direct objects (e.g. Mi legas libron.)
2. Direction of movement (after some prepositions, including en)

Compare:

• Mi estas en la kafejo. = I am in the café (location, no movement → no -n)
• Mi iras en la kafejon. = I go into the café (movement toward the inside → kafejon)

In your sentence, en la kafejo just describes where they are / the action happens, not movement into it, so we use kafejo (without -n).

What does amikino mean, and why not just amiko?

In Esperanto:

• amiko = friend (grammatically male, by default)
• -in- is the feminine suffix.
• amikino = female friend

So mia amikino means “my (female) friend” or “my girlfriend”, depending on context.

Some gender‑related notes:

• patro = father; patrino = mother
• instruisto = (male or unspecified) teacher; instruistino = female teacher

If you don’t want to specify the gender, many speakers today use:

• mia amiko to mean just “my friend” in a neutral way in context, or
• explicitly neutral forms like miaj amikoj (my friends, plural, gender‑mixed) or newer proposed forms (which vary and are less standardized).

Why do interreton and libron end in -n?

Those words are direct objects of the verbs:

• uzas la interreton → “uses the internet”
• legas libron → “reads a book”

In Esperanto, the direct object of a verb always takes the accusative ending -n:

• Mi manĝas pomon. = I eat an apple.
• Ŝi vidas la hundon. = She sees the dog.

So:

• la interreto (subject or just a noun) → la interreton when it is the direct object
• libro → libron when it is the direct object of legi

Why is it uzas la interreton? Could I also say uzas interreton or uzas la reton?

All of these are possible; the differences are in nuance:

• uzi la interreton = to use the internet (the global network, as a specific thing)
• uzi interreton = to use an internet / some internet – grammatically possible, but sounds odd because “the internet” is usually treated as a single known thing.
• uzi la reton = to use the net / the network – often understood to mean “the internet” in context, but reto is more general (“network” of any kind).

In normal modern usage, uzi la interreton is the most straightforward way to say “use the internet”.

Why does the sentence use the simple present (uzas, legas) instead of something like “is using / is reading”? Is there a progressive tense in Esperanto?

Esperanto does not have a separate progressive tense like English “am doing”; the simple present covers both:

• Mia amikino uzas la interreton.
  → She uses the internet / She is using the internet (context decides).
• Mi legas libron.
  → I read a book / I am reading a book.

If you really want to emphasize “right now, in progress”, you can add nun or use a participle construction:

• Mia amikino nun uzas la interreton.
• Mia amikino estas uzanta la interreton. (possible but often feels overly long in everyday speech)

In most cases, uzas and legas alone are enough and natural.

What does dum mean here, and how is it different from kiam?

dum means while / during.

In your sentence:

• dum mi legas libron = while I read a book / while I am reading a book

Comparison:

• dum focuses on the duration and overlap of two actions:
  
  • Ŝi kuiras, dum mi purigas. = She cooks while I clean.
• kiam means when, more like a point in time or event:
  
  • Kiam mi legis la libron, mi lernis multon. = When I read the book, I learned a lot.

You do not normally say dum kiam; you choose dum or kiam depending on what you want to express.

Is the comma before dum necessary in Esperanto?

The comma is optional but common here.

Esperanto punctuation is similar to English:

• You often use a comma before a clause introduced by dum, ke, kiam, etc., especially when the clause comes after the main clause:
  • Mia amikino uzas la interreton, dum mi legas libron.

You could also write it without a comma:

• Mia amikino uzas la interreton dum mi legas libron.

Both are acceptable. The comma slightly clarifies the structure, especially in longer sentences, so many writers keep it.

Why is it mi legas libron and not mi legas la libron?

Both are possible, but they mean different things:

• Mi legas libron. = I’m reading a book (unspecified which book; any book).
• Mi legas la libron. = I’m reading the book (a specific book that you and the listener know about).

In the original sentence, nothing earlier specifies a particular book, so libron (without la) fits naturally: you’re just reading some book.

Can I change the word order, for example: Mia amikino en la kafejo uzas la interreton, dum mi legas libron?

Yes. Esperanto word order is quite flexible, especially because the accusative -n marks the object.

All of these are grammatically correct:

• En la kafejo mia amikino uzas la interreton, dum mi legas libron.
• Mia amikino uzas la interreton en la kafejo, dum mi legas libron.
• Mia amikino en la kafejo uzas la interreton, dum mi legas libron.

The differences are in emphasis:

• Starting with En la kafejo highlights the place first.
• Putting en la kafejo later can make it feel more like an afterthought or clarification of where.

Speakers usually prefer subject–verb–object order for clarity, but other orders are used for style or emphasis.

How do I pronounce kafejo, interreto, and legas?

Pronunciation rules in Esperanto are very regular:

• Stress is always on the second‑to‑last syllable.
• Each letter has a single, consistent sound.

For your words:

• kafejo → syllables: ka‑FE‑jo
  
  • k as in kite
  • a like a in father
  • f as in fan
  • e like e in bet
  • j like English y in yes
  • o like o in Italian/Spanish no
• interreto → in‑ter‑RE‑to
  
  • r is rolled or tapped (like Spanish r)
  • stress on RE
• legas → LE‑gas
  
  • g always hard, like in go, never like j in giant

So the full sentence has stresses:
En la ka‑FE‑jo mia ami‑KI‑no U‑zas la in‑ter‑RE‑ton, dum mi LE‑gas LI‑bron.

Could mia amikino also mean “my girlfriend”, not just “my (female) friend”?

Yes, it can mean “my girlfriend”, depending on context.

• amiko / amikino literally means “friend”.
• For “boyfriend / girlfriend” many speakers say:
  • koramiko (boyfriend), koramikino (girlfriend), literally “heart‑friend”.
• But in everyday speech, people sometimes use:
  • mia amikino = my female friend / my girlfriend
  • Context (how you talk about her) usually makes it clear.

If you want to be unambiguous about a romantic relationship, koramiko / koramikino is safer.