Mi vidis la domon, kiun oni anoncis en la jxrnalo

So I know for sure domo needs a ~n. What I don't know is why kiu needs one also. Also answers like kiu is a direct object isn't helping.

jctrulz:So I know for sure domo needs a ~n. What I don't know is why kiu needs one also. Also answers like kiu is a direct object isn't helping.

Kiu needs the N-ending for exactly the same reason "domo" needs it, which, I'm sorry to have to tell you, is because it is the direct object. Domo is the direct object of vidis, and kiu is the direct object of anoncis. The reason is that "kiu" stands for the thing that is announced.

Hope this helps.

Domo is obvious cause its the thing that's being seen, all very easy so far. But I just don't see it for kiu. How is "which" in "Which they announced in the newspaper" an object, the same way as "house" in "I saw a house"?

jctrulz:Domo is obvious cause its the thing that's being seen, all very easy so far. But I just don't see it for kiu. How is "which" in "Which they announced in the newspaper" an object, the same way as "house" in "I saw a house"?

Both vidi and anonci are transitive verbs so they need some direct object. What did you see? Kion vi vidis? I saw a house. Mi vidis domon. Which house did you see? Kiun domon vi vidis? The house which was announced in the newspaper. La domon, kiun oni anoncis en la ĵurnalo. Which house was announced in the newspaper? Kiun domon oni anoncis en la ĵurnalo? The house which I saw. La domon, kiun mi vidis.

jctrulz:How is "which" in "Which they announced in the newspaper" an object, the same way as "house" in "I saw a house"?

Because "kiu" stands for the thing that is announced. The thing that is announced is the object of "anonci", ergo "kiu" is the object.

Just change kiun to domo, and you’ll understand.

Mi vidis la domon
S    V        O
Oni anoncis la domon
S    V             O

Mi vidis la domon, kiun oni anoncis.
S    V      O              O     S       V

Perhaps in this kind of sentences it isn’t so clear but look at this one.

I saw the man, whom he bit to.

Here I will translate wrongly the second part to clarify: Mi vidis la viron, kiu li mordis.

Well, in that sentence we don't know who bit to who, but well translated:

Mi vidis la viron, kiun li mordis.

We can see clearly who bit to who and it’s clearer why kiu needs the -n.

Ĝis, Novatago.

jctrulz:Domo is obvious cause its the thing that's being seen, all very easy so far. But I just don't see it for kiu. How is "which" in "Which they announced in the newspaper" an object, the same way as "house" in "I saw a house"?

The same way as "I saw a house." is "They announced a house in the newspaper."

If that will help or is ever needed.

Mi vidis la domon, kiun oni anoncis en la ĵurnalo. There're two clauses (chucks, parts, whatever): "mi vidis la domon" and "kiun oni anoncis en la ĵurnalo". We took two sentences ( "mi vidis la domon" and "oni anoncis la domon en la ĵurnalo" ) and blended them into one. So let's look at them separately. In the first clause "mi" is a subject the doer, "vidis" is a verb, the action, and "la domon" is an object, the thing that the action is done to, and since the object is direct, since we don't actually need any preposition, we need an "n"-ending. In the second clause "oni" is a subject, "anoncis" is a verb. And "kiun" is an object, because this "kiu" stands for "domo", and we announced this very "kiu" which is this very house. We just don't call this house a house another time because it would be abundant and everybody understands that "kiu" is this "domo". And since that object is direct we need an "n"-ending. In English the things is done the same way, direct object is just marked only by the word order without any ending. "I saw the house which they announced in the magazine". There're also two clauses, two chunks. In the first clause, "I" is a subject, "saw" is a verb, and "the house" is an object. In the second one, "they" is a subject, "announced" is a verb, and "which" is an object which stand for "the house". We just intermingle those subject, verb, and object a little bit, because it's the way English grammar works.

So when you think whether you need to put this god-damn "n"-ending, try to divide the sentence into chunks (commas, semicolons, colons, conjunctions like "and", "so", "but" and pronouns that works as conjunctions like "who", "which" would help), and for each of them, think of:
- what or who performs the action, which will be the subject and doesn't need any "n"-s
- what action is performed, and this will be the verb
- what or who the action is directed at, which will be the the object
- if the object doesn't need any prepositions and isn't used with "esti", "fariĝi", "iĝi" put an "n"-ending
- otherwise don't put any "n"-s

jctrulz:Mi vidis la domon, kiun oni anoncis en la jxrnalo

So I know for sure domo needs a ~n. What I don't know is why kiu needs one also. Also answers like kiu is a direct object isn't helping.

There is too a short way to see that:

Mi vidis la domon, (la domon) kiun oni anoncis...

Mi konas homon, kiu anoncis en la ĵurnalo sian propran morton.

Kiu (referring back to the man) is the subject of anoncis.

If you said Mi konas homon, kiu oni anoncis en la ĵurnalo .. you wouldn't know whether the subject of anoncis was kiu or oni.

In the case of houses you know that that they can't place ads in the newspaper or write articles, but the grammar insists that you mark the functions correctly.

However you could write Mi loĝas en domo, kiu (oni tiel anoncis en la ĵurnalo) estis detruita en la hieraŭa ŝtormo.