Learn Hardcore Hungarian: A szállodában a mi szobánk a második emeleten van. - In the hotel our room is on the second floor.

In Hungarian, possessed nouns and most specific things normally take a definite article. We’re talking about a specific hotel that the speaker and listener know about, so a szállodában is “in the (specific) hotel”, not just some hotel in general.

Also, word order: A szállodában is placed first because Hungarian often starts the sentence with the topic (what we’re talking about) — here, “in the hotel”.

What does the ending -ban in szállodában mean, and why is it -ban, not -ben?

The ending -ban/-ben is the inessive case, meaning “in, inside”.

szálloda = hotel
szállodá + ban → szállodában = in the hotel

Hungarian chooses -ban vs -ben according to vowel harmony:

Words with mostly back vowels (a, á, o, ó, u, ú) take -ban:
- szálloda → szállodában
Words with mostly front vowels (e, é, i, í, ö, ő, ü, ű) take -ben:
- terem (room, hall) → teremben (“in the hall”)

So szálloda has back vowels á, o, a, so it takes -ban.

Why do we say a mi szobánk instead of just mi szoba for “our room”?

Two separate points:

Possessive nouns in Hungarian normally take the definite article:
- a szobám – my room
- a szobád – your room
- a szobánk – our room
So “our room” is usually a szobánk, not just szobánk. When you add the pronoun mi (“we/our”) for emphasis, it becomes a mi szobánk.
The possessive meaning is expressed on the noun, not on the pronoun.
The word mi on its own means just “we”; the possessive is formed on the noun:
- mi
  - szoba → a mi szobánk (“our room”)
- literally: “the our room”

So mi szoba is ungrammatical as “our room”; you must mark the possessive on the noun: szobánk.

What does the ending -nk in szobánk mean?

The ending -nk is the 1st person plural possessive ending, meaning “our”.

szoba = room
szobá + nk → szobánk = our room

Other examples:

ház (house) → házunk (our house)
autó (car) → autónk (our car)

So in szobánk, the -nk tells you it belongs to “us”. That’s why the pronoun mi is technically not needed for the basic meaning “our room”; it just adds emphasis.

Why does szoba change to szobánk with á, not szobank?

In many Hungarian nouns ending in -a or -e, that final vowel becomes long á or é before possessive endings. So:

szoba → szobá-
- nk → szobánk (our room)
kutya (dog) → kutyánk (our dog)
alma (apple) → almám (my apple)

Similarly with -e:

szeme (his/her eye) → szemem (my eye)
kereke (its wheel) → kerekem (my wheel)

So the vowel lengthening (a → á) is a regular spelling and pronunciation rule when adding possessive suffixes to many -a/-e ending nouns.

If szobánk already means “our room”, why do we also say mi? Is mi necessary?

No, it’s not necessary for the basic meaning.

A szobánk a második emeleten van.
= Our room is on the second floor.

Adding mi makes it emphatic:

A mi szobánk a második emeleten van.
= Our room is on the second floor (as opposed to someone else’s room).

So:

Without mi: neutral “our room”.
With mi: stressed “our room (not theirs/yours)”.

Grammatically both are correct; the choice is about emphasis.

Why is there another a before mi szobánk? Could we say just Mi szobánk?

In standard, neutral Hungarian, possessed nouns almost always take the definite article:

a szobám – my room
a barátom – my friend
a mi szobánk – our room

You can drop the article for special stylistic or poetic effects, but in everyday speech the natural form is a mi szobánk, not mi szobánk. So in this sentence, a is required for normal, correct wording.

What case is emeleten, and why do we use -en here?

Emeleten is in the superessive case (-n/-on/-en/-ön), which basically means “on, on the surface of, at”.

emelet = floor, storey
emelet + en → emeleten = on the floor

We use the superessive for many locations that are thought of as a surface or level:

az asztalon – on the table
a széken – on the chair
a második emeleten – on the second floor

The choice among -n/-on/-en/-ön depends on phonology:

back-vowel + consonants like aszalton → -on
front-vowel words like emelet → emeleten

So emeleten = “on the floor”.

Why is it második, not something like kettődik, for “second”?

Hungarian ordinal numbers (first, second, third, …) are mostly formed with the suffix -dik, but 2 is irregular:

1: egy → első (first)
2: kettő / két → második (second)
3: három → harmadik (third)
4: négy → negyedik (fourth)
5: öt → ötödik (fifth), etc.

So:

második emelet = the second floor
harmadik emelet = the third floor

There is no form kettődik; második is the correct word.

Why do we say a második emeleten, with an article, not just második emeleten?

Hungarian normally uses a definite article with specific things, including specific floors:

az első emeleten – on the first floor
a második emeleten – on the second floor
a harmadik emeleten – on the third floor

Leaving the article out (második emeleten) would sound like a note or a telegraphic label, not a natural full sentence. So a második emeleten is the normal, grammatical form in this context.

Can we change the word order? For example, could we say A mi szobánk a szállodában a második emeleten van?

Yes, Hungarian word order is relatively flexible, but word order changes the focus/emphasis.

Neutral, topic–comment order for this sentence:

A szállodában a mi szobánk a második emeleten van.
Topic: “In the hotel” → Comment: where our room is.

Other possible orders:

A mi szobánk a szállodában a második emeleten van.
Topic: “Our room” → saying where it is (in the hotel, on the second floor).
A mi szobánk a második emeleten van a szállodában.
Sounds less natural; a szállodában at the end feels like an afterthought.

All are understandable, but the given sentence is a natural way to start with the general location (A szállodában) and then narrow down to the exact place of our room (a második emeleten).

Why do we need van here? I thought Hungarian often drops “to be” in the present tense.

Hungarian does often drop the 3rd person singular present of “to be” (van) in identity or description sentences:

Ő tanár. – He/She is a teacher.
A szoba nagy. – The room is big.

But when “to be” expresses location or existence, van is usually kept:

A szoba az emeleten van. – The room is on the floor.
A bolt a sarkon van. – The shop is on the corner.
A kulcs az asztalon van. – The key is on the table.

Our sentence is about location (“is on the second floor”), so:

A szállodában a mi szobánk a második emeleten van.

Dropping van here (… a második emeleten.) would sound incorrect or at least very unnatural.

Why is it szállodában (“in the hotel”) and not something like szállodánál (“at the hotel”)?

Different case endings express slightly different relationships:

szállodában – in the hotel (inside the building)
szállodánál – at/by the hotel (in the area, outside, nearby)

Because a room is physically inside the hotel building, szállodában is the natural choice. You’d use szállodánál for things outside or near the hotel:

A buszmegálló a szállodánál van. – The bus stop is at the hotel.

How do Hungarian floor numbers compare with British and American English? Does második emelet really mean “second floor”?

The literal translation of második emelet is “second floor”, but the counting systems differ:

In Hungarian:
- földszint – ground floor (street level)
- első emelet – 1st floor above ground
- második emelet – 2nd floor above ground
- harmadik emelet – 3rd floor above ground, etc.
In British English:
- ground floor = Hungarian földszint
- first floor = Hungarian első emelet
- second floor = Hungarian második emelet
In American English (no “ground floor”):
- first floor = Hungarian földszint
- second floor = Hungarian első emelet
- third floor = Hungarian második emelet

So második emelet =

“second floor” in British English,
“third floor” in American English.

Could we use hotel instead of szálloda in this sentence?

Yes. Hungarian uses both szálloda and hotel. Hotel is a loanword but very common, especially in branding and informal speech.

A hotelben a mi szobánk a második emeleten van.

Note the case ending changes by vowel harmony:

hotel has front vowels → hotelben (“in the hotel”)
szálloda has back vowels → szállodában

Both versions are natural; szálloda feels a bit more “native”/formal, hotel a bit more international.

Why is the inessive -ban/-ben different from the superessive -on/-en/-ön? In English we just say “on the second floor of the hotel”.

Hungarian distinguishes more precisely between “in” and “on”:

-ban/-ben = “in, inside” (inessive)
- a szállodában – in the hotel
- a szobában – in the room
-n/-on/-en/-ön = “on, on top of, on the level of” (superessive)
- az emeleten – on the floor
- az asztalon – on the table

So the structure is literally:

A szállodában / a mi szobánk / a második emeleten van.
“In the hotel, our room is on the second floor.”

English often compresses this to “Our room is on the second floor of the hotel”, but Hungarian keeps the two relationships separate: in the hotel vs on the floor.