Sen elektro ni sidis en la salono kaj ŝaltis du kandelojn.

Sen is the normal Esperanto preposition for without.

It is followed by the normal noun form, not the accusative unless something else requires it. So:

• sen elektro = without electricity
• sen mono = without money
• sen mi = without me

In this sentence, elektro is just the object of the preposition sen, so it stays in its basic form.

Esperanto uses la only when the noun is definite in a way the speaker wants to mark clearly.

Here, sen elektro means something like without electricity / with no electricity, referring to electricity as a general condition, not to one specific electricity. That is why la is not needed.

Compare:

• sen elektro = without electricity
• sen la elektro = without the electricity / without that electricity

The second version would sound much more specific.

Sidis is the past tense of sidi, which means to sit or to be sitting.

So:

• mi sidas = I sit / I am sitting
• mi sidis = I sat / I was sitting
• mi sidos = I will sit / I will be sitting

In Esperanto, the simple tense often covers both English ideas:

• we sat
• we were sitting

The exact English translation depends on context.

Because Esperanto usually prefers the simpler tense form when it is enough.

• ni sidis = we sat / we were sitting

You can say ni estis sidantaj for we were sitting, but that is more explicit and often less natural unless you really want to stress the ongoing action.

So in ordinary Esperanto, sidis is the normal choice.

En means in.

• en la salono = in the living room / in the salon

The noun salono means a living room, sitting room, or lounge-type room in a house.

The -o ending shows it is a noun, and la means the.

This is a very common vocabulary question.

• ĉambro = room, chamber, any room in general
• salono = living room, lounge, salon, a more specific kind of room

So:

• en la ĉambro = in the room
• en la salono = in the living room

Using salono gives more specific information.

Because the same subject applies to both actions.

• ni sidis ... kaj ŝaltis ... = we sat ... and lit ...

In Esperanto, just like in English, you do not need to repeat the subject if it stays the same.

You could say ni sidis en la salono kaj ni ŝaltis du kandelojn, but repeating ni is unnecessary here.

Because both actions happened in the past.

• sidis = sat / were sitting
• ŝaltis = switched on / lit

In Esperanto, each verb shows its own tense with its ending:

• -is = past
• -as = present
• -os = future

Since both actions belong to the same past situation, both verbs use -is.

Yes, ŝalti often means to switch on, especially for lights, devices, electricity, and similar things.

But it is also used more broadly for turning on or kindling something that produces light or flame. So with candles, ŝalti kandelojn means to light candles.

Examples:

• ŝalti la lampon = switch on the lamp
• ŝalti la radion = turn on the radio
• ŝalti kandelon = light a candle

So this usage is completely normal.

Because kandelojn is the direct object of ŝaltis.

They lit what?
du kandelojn = two candles

In Esperanto, direct objects take -n. If the noun is plural, it already has -j, so the full ending becomes -jn.

• kandelo = candle
• kandeloj = candles
• kandelon = a candle as direct object
• kandelojn = candles as direct object

So:

• Ni ŝaltis du kandelojn. = We lit two candles.

Numbers in Esperanto normally do not change for case or number.

So:

• du kandeloj = two candles
• mi vidas du kandelojn = I see two candles

The noun changes, not the number.

That is why it is du kandelojn, not anything like dujn kandelojn.

Yes. Esperanto word order is fairly flexible, because endings show grammatical roles.

The original order is very natural:

• Sen elektro ni sidis en la salono kaj ŝaltis du kandelojn.

But you could also say:

• Ni sidis en la salono kaj ŝaltis du kandelojn sen elektro.
• En la salono ni sidis kaj ŝaltis du kandelojn sen elektro.

However, not every version sounds equally natural. The original puts sen elektro first, which nicely sets the scene: without electricity.

So the grammar allows flexibility, but style and clarity still matter.

Ŝ is pronounced like English sh in shoe.

So:

• ŝalti sounds roughly like SHAL-tee
• ŝaltis sounds roughly like SHAL-tees

A few pronunciation notes:

• ŝ = sh
• a = like a in father
• i = like ee
• stress is on the second-to-last syllable, so ŜAL-tis

It can suggest both, depending on context.

• ni sidis en la salono gives the background situation
• kaj ŝaltis du kandelojn adds another past action

So the sense is something like: We were in the living room, sitting there, and we lit two candles.

Esperanto does not force a very precise distinction here. The simple past -is can be used for both background and completed actions, and context supplies the exact nuance.

If someone wanted to be more explicit about the ongoing background, they might use a different structure, but the given sentence is normal and natural.