Mi metas la novan kameraon sur la tablon kaj rigardas kelkajn malnovajn fotojn.

Breakdown of Mi metas la novan kameraon sur la tablon kaj rigardas kelkajn malnovajn fotojn.

mi
I
la
the
sur
on
tablo
the table
kaj
and
nova
new
malnova
old
rigardi
to look at
meti
to put
kamerao
the camera
kelka
some
foto
the photo
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Esperanto grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Esperanto now

Questions & Answers about Mi metas la novan kameraon sur la tablon kaj rigardas kelkajn malnovajn fotojn.

Why do so many words end in -n: kameraon, tablon, novan, kelkajn, malnovajn, fotojn?

The -n ending marks the accusative case in Esperanto. In this sentence it is used for:

  • Direct objects of verbs:
    • kameraon is what I put → direct object of metas.
    • fotojn is what I look at → direct object of rigardas.
  • Direction of movement after a preposition:
    • sur la tablon = onto the table (movement toward a place).

Adjectives that describe these nouns (novan, kelkajn, malnovajn) also take -n to match the noun in case.

Why is it sur la tablon and not sur la tablo?

Esperanto uses the accusative -n after some prepositions to show movement toward something.

  • sur la tablo = on the table (location, no movement).
  • sur la tablon = onto the table (you move/put something so it ends up on the table).

Because meti (to put) involves movement to a final position, we say sur la tablon here.

Why do the adjectives also have -n: novan, kelkajn, malnovajn?

In Esperanto, adjectives agree with the nouns they describe in:

  • Number:
    • singular noun → -a (e.g. nova kamerao)
    • plural noun → -aj (e.g. novaj fotoj)
  • Case (accusative):
    • singular accusative → -an (e.g. novan kameraon)
    • plural accusative → -ajn (e.g. malnovajn fotojn, kelkajn fotojn)

So because kameraon, fotojn are in the accusative, the adjectives that modify them must also end in -n.

Why is kameraon singular but fotojn plural?

That simply follows the intended meaning:

  • la novan kameraon = the new camera → just one camera → singular -o, accusative -on.
  • kelkajn malnovajn fotojn = some old photos → more than one photo → plural -oj, accusative -ojn.

If you wanted just one old photo, you’d say kelkan malnovan foton (singular, accusative).

Why is there no second mi before rigardas? Shouldn’t it be Mi metas … kaj mi rigardas …?

Esperanto normally omits a repeated subject when it stays the same:

  • Mi metas … kaj rigardas … = I put … and (I) look at …

The subject mi is understood for rigardas because it is the same as for metas.
You can say Mi metas … kaj mi rigardas …, and it is grammatically correct, but it sounds more heavy and is usually unnecessary unless you want to emphasize mi.

Could the sentence be Mi metas la novan kameraon sur la tablon kaj mi rigardas kelkajn malnovajn fotojn? Is there any difference?

Yes, that version is grammatically correct. The difference is only in style:

  • With the second mi: slightly more explicit, more formal or emphatic.
  • Without the second mi (original sentence): more natural, smoother in ordinary speech and writing.

The meaning (who does the actions and when) stays the same.

Why is it metas and not meti or metis?

Esperanto verb endings show tense:

  • -i → infinitive (to put) → meti
  • -as → present (put / am putting) → metas
  • -is → past (put / have put) → metis
  • -os → future (will put) → metos

In Mi metas … we are talking about the present (now / generally), so the verb takes the -as ending.

Does Mi metas … kaj rigardas … mean “I am putting … and I am looking …” or “I put … and I look …”? How do continuous tenses work?

The present tense -as in Esperanto covers both:

  • simple present (I put, I look), and
  • present continuous (I am putting, I am looking).

Context decides which English translation fits best.
If you really want to emphasize the ongoing nature of the action, you can add an adverb or phrase like nun (now) or ĝuste nun (right now), but the verb form itself stays -as.

Why is there no la before kelkajn malnovajn fotojn?

Kelkaj already acts like a determiner meaning some / several, so we normally don’t add the article:

  • kelkajn fotojn = some photos
  • la fotojn = the photos
  • la kelkajn fotojn = the few photos (a specific, known subset)

In your sentence you just mean “some old photos” in general, not a specific known group, so no la is used.

Can I change the word order, for example: Mi metas sur la tablon la novan kameraon?

Yes. Esperanto word order is relatively flexible, especially because the accusative -n shows what plays which role. All of these are correct and mean the same:

  • Mi metas la novan kameraon sur la tablon.
  • Mi metas sur la tablon la novan kameron. (slightly marked, but okay)
  • Sur la tablon mi metas la novan kameraon. (emphasizes the place)

For the noun phrase with several modifiers, it is usual (but not obligatory) to put kelkajn before malnovajn:
kelkajn malnovajn fotojn sounds more natural than malnovajn kelkajn fotojn.

What is the difference between rigardi and vidi? Why is it rigardas and not vidas?
  • rigardi = to look at, to watch → an active action: you direct your eyes on purpose.
  • vidi = to see → more passive: you see something because it is visible.

In the sentence, you are actively looking at the photos, so rigardas is the natural choice.
If you said Mi vidas kelkajn malnovajn fotojn, it would mean “I see some old photos” (they come into your field of vision).

Is kamerao the standard word for “camera”? Could I also say fotilo?

Both exist:

  • kamerao is an international root, common and fully accepted for camera.
  • fotilo literally means photo-device and is also used for camera.

Many speakers use kamerao for modern cameras (including phone cameras) and fotilo in more technical or descriptive contexts, but in practice both are understood and acceptable here.

Why do we use sur and not al for “on(to) the table”? Could I say al la tablo?
  • al means to, toward (direction), but says nothing about where exactly the object ends up.
  • sur means on, and with accusative (sur la tablon) it means onto (movement to a place on top).

Mi metas la novan kameraon al la tablo would be odd or unclear, like “I put the new camera to the table” in English.
To express placing it onto the surface, you need sur la tablon.