As a Finn, I've done most of this by heart and maybe only delved into the logic in elementary school which I don't even remember. So it's really interesting to see this deeper dive into it. I watched your other video where you only talked Finnish and it's very understandable and clear spoken language. I'm impressed.
From the Ahvenanmaassa vs. Ahvenanmaalla I started to think about one city name that even YLE articles have often gotten wrong. The city is called Virrat that means "streams/currents" and many times you see the incorrect form of Virroissa (or more often any other case) when something is written to be in Virrat. The correct form of course being Virroilla. To my ear Virroissa sounds that you are talking about being on/in streams/currents and Virroilla is more vague vicinity of currents/streams which is more fitting for being also on dry land instead of just in the streams/currents. Ahvenanmaa in Finnish could be translated as "land of the perch" so saying Ahvenanmaassa would be in the ground of/country owned by a perch while Ahvenanmaalla is being in the area where there are perch. So Thaimaassa is in that logic in a country owned by Thai people rather than Thaimaalla where there would be just random Thai people around.
The most common reason for using lla/llä for a place is that it is named after a river or wetlands etc. You are not IN the river, you are BY the river. Niemi means peninsula. In Keitaniemi you are ON the peninsula, but in Rovaniemi, you are really just somewhere around some peninsula that is just a tiny part of what is now called Rovaniemi. Again, you are BY Rovaniemi. Ahvenanmaa is a bit different, but I guess it's just because the area is loosely defined. It could be the main island, or the archipelago around it. Hence you are just in the general area, just as with Rovaniemi.
Niemi also mean a cape, a smaller hook of land. And the analogy is closer to being on something or being in something. And as Rovaniemi is a larger area than just a specific cape, you are "on" Rovaniemi, but as Hakaniemi, Keilaniemi are specific capes and known points you are "in" Hakaniemi. It's a different thing if you in the plane = Lentokoneessa, or if you are on the plane = Lentokoneella like some mechanics may be. Tampere is another exception to the rule of being in the City.... Jyväskylässä, Turussa, Oulussa, but Tampereella. You are on the Tampere ground, because if you'd be Tampereessa, you'd actually be in the Tammerkoski river/rapids, that give the name to the City. I suppose you don't want to be in that river? You are not suicidal, are you? Same goes to the Uusimaa. Rather be walking on it than buried in it..?
Internal cases are used for original settlement names like towns and countries. External cases are used when a settlement is named after an existing terrain feature. Uudessa Kapungissa- original city name. Uudella Maalla, since the territory was named before it became an administrative province. Names of terrain features take external case. eg. Britanniassa Britannialla = in UK in Great Britain
Generally, If you are talking about a geographical locattion or a derived place name like niemi, you normally use adessive cases, like Rovaniemellä. There are exceptions, however, like "asun Lahdessa", but you should say "soudan lahdella" instead. Confusing, really.. Good luck! 👍🏼
I used to live in Tohmajärvi. If you say "Tohmajärvellä", it means the place (or town) If you say "Tohmajärvessä", it means in the lake called Tohmajärvi
Yes. I guess in the end you got the point. Often it is about local history how people define it. Helsinki person buys ticket to RIIHIMÄELLE, but Riihimäki person buys it to RIIHIMÄKEEN.
We Finns don’t always know those place names either. Many years ago, I spent some time in Riihimäki (Riihimäellä) but over time learned that the locals say Riihimäessä. There is a place next to Oulu called Kempele, and I always thought it was Kempeleellä (like Simpeleellä?) but no, it is Kempeleessä. Which btw sounds a little like a mild expletive. 😅
I have heard from some local that there is one place where that has some sense. Kontiolahdella means inside the municipality, but Kontiolahdessa means that you're in the central town of that municipality.
Exactly this. I get the feeling that names of places in Finland are not strictly following literary rules and logic, but instead they have been more freely adopted by the local population and over time established as the official way. Most of these you learn through accumulated experience by reading news etc. but especially in case of smaller, less known places it's best to ask the locals lol There are some smaller local oddities like Valkeakoski, which you can refer to as Valkeakoskella OR Koskissa (but NOT Valkeakoskissa!).
There's even more annoying thing locally here - Kangasala. My Finnish non-local ear says "Kangasalalla", but the locals say "Kangasalla". Kangasalalta -> Kangasalta. When visiting Kaustinen, you don't go to Kaustisille (logical Finnish, am I right), but to Kaustiselle. Imatralla / Imatrassa. Apparently there is no real set rule on what is correct, but the local use takes presedence in these cases. Sometimes there are two "acceptable" ways to say the place name even among the locals.
Järeää salapoliisityötä (mysteerimusa oli hauska lisä)! According to legend, people in Finland heard about this other language that not only had had two different alphabets but also a symbolic glyph table of thousands of iconic characters, which can be read in many different ways, according to context. In view of this genius act of trolling, Finnish people wondered how on earth could they top that. In the end, they gave up as it would take unnecessary amounts of irrational work and just added as many conjugations and exceptions randomly pretty much everywhere. It is still unknown if we managed to win the golden trophy.
Funnily I have seen this error in actual(local) newspaper articles in Finland too, so it makes sense to me that non-native people can get confused with the way the names of different towns are declined. A few years ago there was a motorcycling accident near Lavia(a small town east of Pori), close to where I live, and the people who were part of it were from a different town called Luvia(a slightly bigger town south west of pori) and there was an article on the local newspaper of Luvia where they incorrectly used the term Lavialla, instead of Laviassa because Luvia happens to bend as Luvialla. So even when two towns are relatively close to each other it is possible to not know how names of said towns are supposed to be declined. Ofcourse this is all because the names of the towns evolved separately from each other and because of this the ways you refer to the towns also evolved locally.
I've never really thought abt that as a Finn, but now that I watched this video I realized how confusing and weird it can be :DD to be honest sometimes I'm not even sure how some of the places are supposed to be said either haha
When place names gradually shift from meaning a geographical entity into a regional entity, like "Lauttasaari" (a ward in Helsinki), or the mentioned "Hakaniemi", they change their inflection from external to internal cases. Some names may currently be in transition, and there are accordingly different opinions about how they should be inflected.
It really does not matter if you just say "minä asua hakaniemi" because its still understandable as a Finn as long as you understand finnish language. But big appreciations for you to trying to really learn Finnish!
@@DAIKIFinlandLife But that's the point in a way, you'll learn by making mistakes. You already speak very good Finnish from what I've heard on your videos, so don't complicate it too much. Regarding the daily conversations with people from Helsinki, some of the words aren't even Finnish. For example a tram can be called spåra/spora (however you want to write it), which comes from Swedish word spårvagn. So my advice would be to just throw yourself in to the conversations and asks your friends and colleagues to correct you if needed. I don't think any sensible person will give you hard time for trying to speak Finnish as a foreigner :)
Well it matters. I understand you want to be courteous but the harsh reality is that it is easier to find a job / make good friends when you do not speak like a caveman. Nothing wrong with making mistakes though. You have to know grammar to express complex thoughts in a coherent and understandable manner.
There is a KOTUS article that brushes on this called "Paikannimien taivutukseen ei ole oikotietä" and it could be succinctly summarized as "Finns cant decide because they are stubborn village fools" but yeah... it depends resource wise KOTUS has a web service called "Asutusnimihakemisto" where you can look for the name of a place and it shows you the typical usages EDIT: kielikello has an article on the names starting with an adjective called "Uudellamaalla, Vanhassakaupungissa ja Pitkälläsillalla" that could be summarized as: your original hypothesis is correct. Adjective starting compound names for places should be in concord...... except ever since the 70's not conjugating the adjective has become more and more popular : ) ... it depends once more
1:08 Almost spit out my water laughing when the guy on the youtube video told me he was going to kill me. Tip from a native speaker: Avoid using the word "tavata" (to meet) in the "tapaan" form until you can speak like a native. Even native speakers occasionally mishear it as "tapan", which means "I will kill". You did pronounce it correctly, but since foreign speakers typically have a lot of difficulty with our lengthened vocals, we're used to always look for mislenghtened vocals to better understand what they're saying. "Tapaan" is also really uncommon in spoken language, so that one's particularly dangerous.
I’m impressed your knowledge of Finnish language! These are not the only strange things in our language.😅 Because our language is full of exceptions, Finns will immediately hear if you are native or not. Even my good friend (who speaks fluent Finnish) sometimes uses a ”wrong” end in the word (her first language was not Finnish).
I like your methodic approach. I almost stopped mid-video to write a corrective comment, then you explained it in much better way than I understand it. Thank you for the video.
One thing about the "uusi" and "vanha" thing is that when I think about the way that I conceptualize the words in my head, the "uusi" and "maa" in "Uusimaa" feel like two separate entities. Same for "Vanhakaupunki", although it's more clear for that since it's sometimes spelled "Vanha Kaupunki" (not the Vanhakaupunki in Helskinki, just a general Vanhakaupunki in any city). With "Vanhakartano", it sort feels like a single entity for some reason.
This is just a wild guess but I think the cases depend on if the name has a compound meaning or if you treat is as more of an abstract name. Ahvenanmaa is literally the land of the bass, if you said "asun Ahvenanmaassa" it sounds like you're living below the ground, not on top of it. While Thaimaa is just a translation of Thailand, Finns don't think of Thailand as land of the Thai, it's just a name for a country.
i think that also explains a bit of the confusion about the adjective and the vanha thing, because when you say vanhassakartanossa, it sounds a lot like you're refering to an actual singular mansion, where as vanhakartanossa sounds more like its an abstract name of a place. for most of the uusi names its basically the same principle but since the individual words aren't usually so clearly mixable (like uusimaa (which if you were actually refering to 'new land' would be written uusi maa) doesn't change from a general area into a very spesific building etc when you change in like that (uudellamaalla). but yeah most of the ssa/ä vs lla/a stuff is purely out of convention, and that could apply to the adjective stuff too
Maybe it's the other way around? "Thaimaassa" is more like "in the Thai-country", not "Thaicountry", while "Ahvenanmaalla" is "in/on the Bassland", not "Bass-land". We don't think Ahvenanmaa being the Land of the Bass, it's just Bassland. Thailand on the other hand is Thai-land or Thai-country, a country belonging to the Thai people.
I think you got it, the way you say it is defined by the people using it, and it sometimes just depends on what sounds better 😅 my favourite is Töölö, some twist it to Töölöössä, when it's clearly Töölössä!! But because its "mennään Töölöön" its also sometimes "Töölöössä". This is a question for the ages!
That is because many think it is "Töölöö". Töölö is a funny name as we do not know what it means or even what language it is. It is a relic of languages spoken in Finland before Finns came i.e. over 3000 years ago.
I seem to remember from my ancient school days that the main thing is the local usage, custom. I'm not sure if I remember the case correctly but for example my "language ear" screams to say "Laukaalla" but supposedly it is "Laukaassa" for some peculiar reason etc
In most cases, Hungarian country names get -ban/-ben (inessive), with the exception of Hungary and most countries which lie on an island (Iceland, Madagascar, Sri Lanka etc. but not Japan nor Indonesia) which get -n (superessive). What names of settlements get, is historically associated with being inside/outside [pre-1920] Hungary. However, there are a lot of exceptions. In many cases, historical Hungarian settlements get -n and non-Hungarians get -ban/-ben, but there are a lot of exceptions. More to say, there are the relicts of the old locative case (-t/-tt): Pécs --> Pécsett, Kolozsvár --> Kolozsvárt.
rovaniemessä would be some small place, but Rovaniemellä it means the rovaniemi the big place. Somehow thats what my heart tells me. Hakaniemessä because hakaniemi is just small part of it. Same goes for Uusimaalla because its the bigger place. When you are on something big its LLA but when you are on your small car its autoSSA. But then again Liikun bussilla, Olen nyt bussissa. Not actually sure about it all myself here :D Good content!
The names of places have their own old traditions, that's why they don't have strict rules. Uusimaa is very special and weird. It's literally "New Land", so you are *on* the land, and a new one for that matter. It's just tradition. The grammar rules have been thought out after the names have been formalized. ;) Also, there is the most special case of Valkeakoski. Everyone in Finland uses "Valkeakoskella", except people living there; for some reason they use "Valkeakoskessa". For an outsider that sounds like they are living in the river rapids that go through the small town (valkeakoski = white rapids). 😄 Finnish spoken language and names are 1000-500 years old and the grammar has really been thoroughly formalized only during the last 100-200 years. The first written Finnish was 500 years ago. But the language itself has been very static for almost a millenium. The written Finnish is mainly based on western and especially Häme dialects, which have been very static and clearly articulated all the time.
People living in Valkeakoski don't say Valkeakoskessa. They say "Koskissa". For example: asutko sä Koskissa? If you translate that directly it means: do you live in the Rapids? Also, a person who lives there is called "koskilainen" . I think it is used more like locally. But if you say: asun Valkeakoskella, it is quite right and understandable, ...but people who live there often prefer saying "Koskissa".
Sometimes, both ways are acceptable. For example, "Kontiolahdessa" and "Kontiolahdella" are both valid conjugations. There's a place north of it called "Juuka". People often say "Juukassa", but it's "Juuassa". Sometimes, you just have to learn things. There's no real logic behind it.
I love your logic here. In many points of this video I was about to give explanation or example but you instantly handled everything I was about to say 😂 I was like "well, how about Vanhakaupunki" and POW you just destroyed my arguments, very nice
Daiki, I have a lot of empathy for you to learn a hard language. Are you confident that you can pass the language requirement to be a permanent resident in Finland? I'm sending you my best wishes and all the best!!
I can confuse you more with neighborhood names that end with ”taka” like Vedentaka or Kankaantaka. Officially, if you are in Vedentaka -> olet VedentaaSSA. But what locals really say is VedentakaNA or KankaantakaNA. 😅
It's Uudellamaalla because uusi (new) is an adjective that directly describes the place (new land). Kalasatama or Seinäjoki don't have adjectives that directly describe the place. So when you have an adjective in a place name, it usually also changes which turns Uusimaa into Uudellamaalla. Hope this clears it up.
Your issues with Finnish cases are similar to my issues when picking the Japanese postpositions で and に. Picking either one can change the meaning of the sentence.Of course, Finnish grammar is way more complex, and noun declension is hard for anyone whose mother tongue doesn't feature grammatical cases. My mother tongue has cases, but only 7- I'd still have to study hard to get used to the Finnish 14.
The word "outo" in "Outokumpu" does not mean "odd" or "strange". It is actually a modified form of "outa", meaning a forest-covered hill. Thus it is a noun, not and adjective.
Hearing you say that you've been to Åland/Ahvenanmaa caught me off guard. I hope you liked it here, it's always fun being mentioned because it's so rare.
Isn't it because Ahvenanmaa is many islands and Uusimaa is many cities that we say ~lla, maybe😅. Vantaa is a river also, Vantaassa therefore means you are in the river Vantaa. As you Daiki noted, we just "know" but it's through the natural language learning process. It's the same with the o/go honorifics such as why is it "o-sushi" not go-sushi.. please explain that. Also, "vanhakaupunki" - I'm the same as your friend- we don't know how to conjugate unless we ask a local. Another example is "Laukaa", it's Laukaalla but only because the local people decided so. Anyone would naturally say "Laukaassa" otherwise. I don't know if Laukaa is a lake or whatever, but lesser known place-names are not something you naturally know how to conjugate. Luckily those are just exceptions to the rules, and the Finnish language can maintain its function 👌 🎉😅
In finnish the names of places or the names for the residents of different cities like "Helsinki - Helsinkiläiset" originate mostly from how the residents themselves call the place they are from or how they describe themselves as the people of that said city. There are are many places where the "correct" term for the residents is unclear and no one can really say what is the correct way like a person from Seinäjoki can be "Seinäjokelainen" or the more common "Seinäjokinen". Both of these are grammatically correct and I think most of these points you brought up in this video are the same way. I think you can use most of these and it will be grammatically correct either way but the residents from these places are the ones who make the last call of what is the "correct" way. Although this doesn't really explain why Thailand is the way it :D
As a Finn I admit that's weird with those endings without any obvious logic. However in French one also has the same situation in some country names. Usually countries have an article, like Finland is La Finlande, Sweden is La Suède. However Denmark is Le Danemark. So you just have to know by heart which one is masculine or feminine.
I'm not a 100% sure about this explanation as I don't have a Finnish teacher close to correct me, so take this "info" with a grain of salt, but as a native speaker I have gotten the picture that the -ssa or -ssä is most of the times used in areas that are originally named after a terrain point (such as niemi-niemessä, mäki-mäessä etc., but not with joki-joessa or other watery places where it sounds as if you are in the water:D) but are nowadays populated by a lot of people and the place in nature isn't as important as it is as an area for people to live at now. This "logic" is often used with parts of the city/town as being part of a bigger entirety such as the city/town. (as -ssa/-ssä implies being inside a boundary of some sort, -lla/-llä emphasizes being on top of the terrain point) Here comes the peculiar part for the foreign learner. Rovaniemi-Rovaniemellä and other cities such as Tampere-Tampereella make exceptions with the rule depending on how the words roll on our tongues (and on our ancestors tongues who have come up with these rules:D) and how the words are wanted to be expressed figuratively as. This exception is mainly made with cities and states, cause they themselves are the "bigger entirety" and might have wanted to be known as a place with the people living on the place in nature such as a hill, cape, mountain etc. (Being on top of the terrain point is emphasized with -lla/-llä) or just as a larger area where a lot of people live in (hence the -ssa/-ssä), but these rules about how it's supposed to be said have formed a long long time ago when the cities have been established (Rovaniemellä the -llä is for the purpose of making it seem for others that the citizens are figuratively living on a terrain point, a cape to be exact and not just in a widely populated area around the cape)
For example in Pori there is a place called Isomäki which is widely known for its icehockeyarena where Porin Ässät play, it's figuratively nicer sounding to say that the arena is on the hill than it is just being loosely somewhere in the area around the hill. (an important location for the city with the terrain point wanted to be emphasized) an example sentence, Porin Ässien halli sijaitsee Isomäellä, -llä being the nicer sounding than -ssä for the native speaker
This is a really good insight on Finnish grammar! I learned a lot from your video :) I think it’s important to remember that language is flexible, and the purpose of grammarians is to describe not prescribe. In other words, I think uusi- and vanha- are treated by most people as attributes to the name, not yet fossilised in the name. However, that town’s name (vanhakartano) is in the process of fossilisation. It’s always very interesting to look into edge cases. Speaking of confusions about Finnish cases, I have one - ilmoittautua It’s ilmoittautua kouluun / yliopistoon, but ilmoittautua kursille I have yet to find any good explanations other than just memorising them.
As a native speaker, the way I see it is that '-Vn' is more direct in the sense that it means being inside, while in contrast '-lle' is more indirect in the sense that it means more just like being around (or other such looser association). Another difference is that '-Vn' can be maybe a bit more "metaphorical", referring to things in abstract, as a concept, or in their entirety, and in contrast ''-lle' is a bit more down-to-earth. For example "Tule kouluun" ("Come to school") could be an order for a missing classmate to come and attend school, while "Tule koululle" ("Come to/by the school") would be just asking them to come to or by the school without assumptions about the reasons, maybe just because they want to hang out at the school yard or something. Likewise, "Ilmoittautua kouluun" ("To enroll into a school") refers to the school as a more immaterial and abstract organization (that you're also "entering into"/joining), while "Ilmoittautua koululle" ("To check in/register with/tell the school") means that you're just communicating with the school as an organization made of people, like when you're telling that you're sick or signing up for an event or something. As with "kurssi", school courses are seen as something that you attend to, and not something that you "are inside of" so to say. While "Ilmoittautua kurssiin" is acceptable and gives the exact same information as "Ilmoittautua kurssille", it does give a little bit more intense sort of vibe, when all you're doing is just regularly attending lectures that follow the course's teaching plan. You have a loose association with "kurssi", you're not a part of it itself. Native speaker would not see the meaning change by swapping "kurssiin" with "kurssille" in most use cases (i think), but if you're talking about a course more directly like "Muutoksia kurssiin" ("Changes to the course") the first one is better, while if you're talking about it more indirectly like "Kurssille osallistuvat" ("Course participants") the second one is better.
@@misterZalli Thanks a lot for your insight! Nuances as such can be confusing for learners, yet so difficult to find good explanations in textbooks. Kiitos paljon :)
I can confirm that there isn't any waterproof logic that works in any cases. Eventually it is about the opinion and tradition of the local residents. I am from place called Laukaa, and many finnish people say naturally "Laukaalla", like "Vantaalla", but correct way is Laukaassa, and the only reason is because we laukaalaiset say Laukaassa 😁Laukaa is such an old world, no one even knows what it means, so there isn't any hint in the meaning
Hi, the names of municipalities, towns and other settlements should be used in the way they are used by the locals. Asutaan Laukaassa, mennään Enontekiölle, ollaan kotoisin Ylitorniolta ja vieraillaan Hikiässä. Even a name that looks the same can be used differently in different places. An example is Torittu: Toritussa (Orivedellä), mutta Toritulla (Padasjoella). So, don't worry too much about how to correctly use the names of places. Sometimes the wrong usage may sound a bit funny (asun Seinäjoessa, are you living in a river??), but it doesn't really affect the understanding.
I've never really thought about it but yeah, it makes no sense xD It's kinda like how English pronounciation is inconsistent. Languages are really complicated so there's always gonna be some illogical stuff you can only learn by trial and error.
Place names is one of those things that often doesnt follow the grammar rules but is rather based on tradition and how the locals would say the name of that town. Even as finns we often get wrong places that we are not familiar with.
My short advide: don't worry about it! :) As you gain more experience, you inevitably will know more of the toponym-locative-trivia, and what's more important, your sense of "ownership" of the language will grow. For example, I as a native speaker feel no problem in sometimes saying "uusimaalle" instead of "uudellemaalle", because it's still grammatically correct, and less cumbersome, and everybody will understand it. Only if I were to write some very official document or give a speech in a formal setting, I'd make sure that I write or speak according to every "arbitrary" convention too.
You just need to learn them. Finnish people also can't deduce the correct one unless they know. There are some very special ones: usually -nen changes into -sissa (to plural inessive) or -silla, but Kaustinen -> Kaustisella. And of course Kangasala -> Kangasalla (not Kangasalallla).
I was wondering if rovaniemi was a district and hakaniemi a town, would the endings still be the same or would we actually use hakaniemellä and rovaniemessä. And if rovaniemi would have a district also called rovaniemi, would you then say rovaniemellä rovaniemessä. Ssa/ssä usually tends to mark specific place: mä oon täällä/mä oon tässä (I'm over here/I'm right here.) Just thinking.
If i recall correctly the endings of place names change depending on if it was founded as a city/town or if it was a place which people visited and had named before anyone lived there. I'm guessing Rovaniemi was already named before anyone lived there while a place like Hakaniemi was named as the district was built. If Hakaniemi was a place with no inhabitants, you would say Hakaniemellä instead of Hakaniemessä. That said it doesn't really make it less confusing which one to use 😅
When I was young and I need to got to school I found those "rules" ver confusing. I'm native speaker and it was easy to learn to write etc. BUT those rules in suomi! O man, I don't understand that rules in language are not same as rules in math. Teachers speaks about rules and when I think I understand certain rues there was exception, always. I think that I'm stupid because those rules were so confusing. :) In math you need to obey certain rules and there is no exceptions. It takes long time to me to understand that "rules" in language are just "kind of rules" with more exceptions than just certain rules.
I've been studying finnish on and off for several years now, focusing mostly on the morphology. Just the inflection of uusi in itself is a good example: first, it's an i final nominal which is not a loanword, so its inflection stem is obtained by changing i into e. However, before i came s, which is incompatible with e in this context, so it must change to t (s/t being one out of four consonant pairs acting in this way, the others being n/m, k/h, and s/h in the word mies). So the inflection stem is uute, but the ssa suffix starts with two consonants, thus weakening any weakenable consonant(s) between the inflection stem's two final syllables, t in this case. A single t has weak form d, and so we finally have the complete inflected form: uudessa. Unfortunately, there are some exceptions to the i/e swapping rule, kaupunki being one of them. It might be because kaupunki is an old loanword from proto-germanic, but äiti also doesn't swap its i, and I'm pretty sure it's not a loan, so idk. It's one of those things that you probably have to learn by heart, just like with your location examples. Same goes for the inflection stem of certain s words. Some follow a clear pattern, like adjectives swapping s for a vowel extension (kaunis > kaunii) and ordinal numbers where s becomes nte (kahdeksas > kahdeksante). Even nominalizations ending in two vowels plus an s can generally be figured out if you know their etymology: vastaus is derived from vastata (a verb) and becomes vastaukse, while vapaus comes from vapaa (an adjective) and becomes vapaute. I still haven't found any logic for nouns ending on a single vowel plus s. According to wiktionary, kirves behaves like kaunis, while ilves behaves like vastaus. No idea why. It's annoying, cause I've spent a lot of time making this very neat hyper-condensed inflection key which handles the vast majority of finnish nominals and verbs, but due to little inconsistencies like these, it will never be 100% perfect :P
Never noticed this before and could not imagine ever having any difficulty conjugating the name of a town, so I thought there must be some rule, even if silly. After trying both ways for some real cities, and some fake ones, I came to the conclusion that both are acceptable, although accepting the wrong one for a well known place takes some serious mental gymnastics. I will therefore endeavor to use the wrong form whenever I can, just to get the chance to argue that it's just as correct as the established form, no matter what Kotus says.
Here is a couple things that came to mind. You are very good at Finnish and learned a lot! Even that the language has many logical things I recall this confusing me in school (I am bilingual). Learning by heart is the best way to learn how to end locations correctly. Not sure if other people have mentioned yet but one special thing with Finnish language is that it has not existed as written for long and it is based on the spoken language. This is why everyone has a dialect where they bend their words differently than they are written. So some rules can't apply to everything since names have come with people and not the text. -LLA is at a place and -SSA is in a place. The words don't always follow this rule sadly. I want to add one thing to -maa. Maa can mean both land or country but also ground. I recommend looking up area rules on the web there are special cases but they apply to most things. Paikannimet taivutus are great search words.
You're right. Place names include hidden extra information. You can't know for sure how to conjugate if you only know the basic form. The correct form should be considered local knowledge and mistakes tolerated. ssa = in (precise). lla = around (less precise), typically used for bodies of water. (vanhakartano)(ssa) implies "vanhakartano" is an old established name, and it would be rude to break it up. (vanhassa)(kartanossa) implies "vanha" is an extra qualifier. I don't know either which one is right.
Adjective is a good quess. It usually worksi. In Tampere there is Mustalahti, Mustassalahdessa. IPitkäniemi (in Nokia), Pitkässäniemessä. But, of cause, Korkeasaari, Korkeasaaressa.
Every inflection has its logic, but they are often forgotten through time. -lla and -ssa can depend on where a train station historically was in a place, or where it is located in relation to water or wetland. Outo in Outokumpu comes from an old word _outa,_ which has its origin in the Sámi word for a forest, _vuovdi._ Therefore it is not an adjective. Whether an adjective is inflected depends on if it is thought of as a descriptor or not.
About the case of "Vanhakartano" I think if you say "Olin vanhassa kartanossa" it wouldn't point to the place Vanhakartano specifically, but just an old mansion (vanha kartano) somewhere. If you say "olin vanhakartanossa" it would imply that specific area. _(I also didn't know this was a place btw lol)_ Vanhakartano in this form would be a so called erisnimi or proper noun. If you were talking about an old mansion that you went to, you would say "olin käymässä vanhassa kartanossa".
I have a couple of friends that are from Kangasala. So you would think that when you say you live in Kangasala, it is "Asun Kangasalalla", but according to them it is "Asun Kangasalla". I have no idea why it is that way.
native finns also get placename conjugations wrong sometimes so don't feel bad about yourself if get them wrong we just know the ones by heart which are huge places or places where we have lived
I agree with you. Our language needs some serious fixing. I hate when Finnish is not working logically. I always have. I know that some (most) of those oddities have historical reasons why they're not following the logical convention. The word used to be different back in history and it was conjucated just fine back then. But then the word changed but the old conjucation stayed, even though it should've changed. And all that's all perfectly understandable, because spoken language can be quite conservative. But we should be able to change that now. To me Finnish should be as logical as possible. We can't really change to spoken Finnish at will, but we can at least change the standard Finnish and ultimately, with time, the spoken Finnish too.
Regarding the inflection of uusi, I would say that it is indeed because it's an adjective. But I can't explain why this doesn't go for all adjectives in compounds.
As you might know, the cities of Turku, Tampere and Helsinki have some fraternal rivalry in the citizens' attitudes towards each other. Hence, me being from Turku, I sometimes talk about this little stinging joke about the tensing of place names: The countryside "maaseutu" tenses as "maaseuduLLA/maaLLA", and town/city "kaupunki" tenses as "kaupungissa". Thus urban locations tense with "SSA" (Turussa, Helsingissä, Porissa) and rural locations tense with "LLA" (Mynämäellä, Vehmaalla). The joke here is that "Tampere" tenses as "TampereeLLA". But there might possibly be some truth behind this, as Rovaniemi is less densely populated place than "Hakaniemi", and "Ahvenanmaa" also is rather spread out, unlike what I think to be a somewhat densely packed "Thaimaa". Also, in "Ahvenanmaa", the part "maa" really means more like "the land of Ahvena" instead of "the kingdon/realm/country of Ahvena", whereas "Thaimaa" is "The country of the Thai people". However, I would officially be saying that it is just based on what the (local) people have decided, as I'm not a proper linguist, and that is what I have been told by the people who are proper linguists.
As finn i was wrong in many examples u gave, i think the trick is to be confident enough when saying those endings so nobody corrects u as they wont know it either
7:45 There's one example missing here to remind you things can never be simple: New Zealand, New Guinea, New York. Uusi-Seelanti, Uusi-Guinea, New York.
I think most of the time it doesn't really matter if you use -ssa(inessive) or -lla(adessive). But if you say for example: Turulla instead of Turussa, it sounds like Turku has something instead in Turku.
About words new uusi and old vanha Uusimaa is Uudellamaalla because its not a real compound word its only writen that way because its a place name but vanhakartano is a real compound word so its vanhakartanossa
I live in Uusikaupunki and I am finn and yes I have sometimes wondered this same thing. When you say kaupungissa and when you say kaupungilla. Kävelin kaupungilla or kaupungissa. There is diffrence but even I speak finnish I just cant make the rule, I guess somehow you just feel it. Btw Uusikaupunki is often shortened "uki" and then you say ukissa which is kinda funny because there is a word "ukki" which means grandfather and is too "ukissa" but it would then mean "in the grandfather" My former boss official title was "Uudenkaupungin kaupungin kaupunginpuutarhuri. " I dont even try to translate that!
Jotenkin tulee sydämelle asia, jos asut Hakaniemessä, asut Helsingin sisällä, Hakaniemessä, jos Hakaniemi olisi Helsingin ulkopuolella, se olisi erillinen asia😂 Myös se, jos olet töissä Keilaniemessä, olet se paikan ns keskellä/keskiössä/sisällä ja samoin Munkkiniemen kohdalla, nämä paikat, eivät ole kaupunkeja, vaan yksittäisiä paikkoja. Rovaniemi taas on kaupunki ja siksi suurempi kokonaisuus ns. Rovaniemellä ollessasi voit olla sen kaupungin laajemmalla alueella, kuin vain kaupungin osassa. Jos sanoisit olevasi Rovaniemessä, se kuulostaisi sille, että olisi tarkalleen yksi ainoa niemi, tarkka paikka. En osaa edes sanoa, onko Rovaniemellä yhtä sen nimistä niemeä? 😂 Jotenkin täytyy osata hieman myös maantietoa, jotta ymmärtää, mistä puhuu🤭
Jos ei halua tehdä yhtään virheitä, pitää opetella ulkoa. Siis jos paikoista puhutaan. Tampereella, Porissa, Rovaniemellä, Valkeakoskissa. Oikea tapa on se mitä paikalliset käyttävät.
@@m1k1a1 Ei Valkeakoskissa, vaan Valkeakoskella tai Koskissa. Nämä molemmat ovat oikein, mutta "Koskissa" on lähinnä paikallisten käyttämä, ja ehkä usein vain paikallisesti, tai paikallisten kanssa. Jossain muualla päin käytettynä voi jopa jäädä epäselväksi, mitä sillä tarkoitetaan. Esim. jos joku koskilainen sanoisi vaikka Kuusamossa olevansa "Koskista", niin kaikki eivät ehkä tietäisi, että mistä.
@@ilonapeck7022 Totta. Kirjoitin väärin halutessani korostaa, että kyseessä on Valkeakoski. Koskeja on Suomessa useita, siksi on esimerkiksi Varsinais-Suomessa kunta Koski Tl. Kunnan kotisivulla esimerkkilause: "Kosken seudun yläaste on seutukunnallinen yläkoulu, jossa oppilaita on Koskelta TL, Marttilasta, Loimaalta ja Salosta." Olenkin yhä vakuuttuneempi, että suomen kielen taivutussäännöt on kehitetty kolmen promillen humalassa.
This video goes very well to the point why Finnish is really hard. One of the better videos I've seen about the subject. This video pretty much explains why I can't teach Finnish, because it comes naturally to me and I have to think hard about why certain things are said in that way, because it comes to me too naturally and I can not explain it cohesively. Ole of my personal gripe is the term used, 'Seinäjokinen', instead of 'Seinäjokelainen'. And a lot of other localities.
wouldn't someone from seinäjoelta be seinäjokilainen? some finnish grammar is just about how letters flow when spoken. reason it is kengässä and not kenkässä. edit. one fun thing is. i went on a scale. kävin vaa'alla. again vaakalla does not flow nice.
@@samikatto2851 It should be 'seinäjokelainen' with e instead of i, but it always isn't dialects are strange sometimes. I do not know why it is so, it just is. When bending names related to water, i often changes to e. Eg. 'Äänekoskelainen' instead of 'Äänekoskilainen'. Koski is a rapid. Applies to järvi, koski, joki, niemi, lahti, maybe some others.
If you know some Finnish, this is something that will really bother some people, before they remember "Mistä ruisleipä on tehty?" the correct answer is "Rukiista.". If you don't know/remember it, it can really start bothering you, because if you try to use logic, one would think the answer is "Ruiksesta" or "Ruissista" and both of those sound and feel so wrong.
This is such a confusing topic that even Finnish linguists aren't quite sure why this is the case. In general, Finnish _should_ have congruence between an attributive adjective and the noun its referring to, as is the case with Uusimaa/UudeLLAmaaLLA. This congruence happens with a little over half of Finnish place names, although that number appears to be shrinking every year and becoming like Outokumpu where the adjective is not in congruence with the noun. Basically its language evolving and becoming more simple, a process that is accelerated by the fact that even Finns don't tend to know how to inflect certain place names. I think in general, the older and more famous a place is, the more likely it is to have that congruence because of that older grammar becoming universally formalised.
@@DAIKIFinlandLife I mean, if you are curious, you could try to email someone at a university Finnish department. Most linguists would probably be delighted to answer the question!
Finnish and Estonian both really went overboard with cases. Too many ways to conjugate stuff. Learning Japanese now, and I can't even put into words how happy I am that Japanese is a much more logical language. Kanji difficulties aside, the sentence structure is infinitely easier. You figure out the core logic and you can learn to say pretty much anything. Good luck with Finnish! がんばれ!
some of these rules are just a bit artbitrary and more based on what "feels right" over something that's correct or universally agreed upon. in fact from my intuition there's a few cases where I disagree with your friends. Similarly I'd probably say Papua-uusi-guineassa as well. maybe part of that is dialectical or generational differences too. the vast differences in accent and vocabulary in different dialects and even from town to town really is enough for me to say that there isn't really just one right Finnish, its just that we vaguely agree on what sounds good and what doesn't and roll with it
as an addendum, big part of this kind of learning is just building up the intuition for these details. you can't really become a native level speaker by memorising them (though I suppose sometimes that's really your only option for some things, even native speakers have to). you have to sort of learn what "feels right". its much easier of course with your native language, but its definitely possible for languages you learn later in life too
You make some very good points in this video. Frankly, I don't understand the declinations of "Uudellamaalla" and "Uudessakaupungissa", either, since it is one of the fundamental grammatical rules of Finnish language that only the last word declines in compound words. That is why I decline them as "Uusimaalla" and "Uusikaupungissa", regardless how the locals decline them.
It is by not a fundamental grammatical rule. There are several compound words where both parts are declined, like omatunto ("hyvällä omallatunnolla"). Previously words like isoveli also were declined like "isollaveljellä" but nowadays many seem to say "isoveljellä".
Always hilarious to me when someone points out these language oddities, when as a native i would not even notice them. But hey do not worry, we finns struggle with our language too. Greetings from / terveisiä Vanhakartano....sta
This is just my own observation but -ssa is usually used in smaller geographic areas and bigger more densly populated places because it implies more exact place. And -lla is used for geographically bigger places because it implies more vague area.
I guess with these kind of situations it is just better to abandon all reason and just go with the feeling. If you ask people to correct you when you make a mistake you will gradualy aquire the right feel for it. Or you will go mental from all the corrections, either or.
Don't forget how Turku changes to Turussa. You need to know to drop the letter K 😄 Also if you want to say in Great Britain, you can say Isossa-Britanniassa or Iso-Britanniassa. I believe it is 50/50 which one people use.
As a Finn, I've done most of this by heart and maybe only delved into the logic in elementary school which I don't even remember. So it's really interesting to see this deeper dive into it. I watched your other video where you only talked Finnish and it's very understandable and clear spoken language. I'm impressed.
Kiitos!
@@DAIKIFinlandLife Try Deciphering some Savo dialect =D you gonna have some fun with that.
From the Ahvenanmaassa vs. Ahvenanmaalla I started to think about one city name that even YLE articles have often gotten wrong. The city is called Virrat that means "streams/currents" and many times you see the incorrect form of Virroissa (or more often any other case) when something is written to be in Virrat. The correct form of course being Virroilla.
To my ear Virroissa sounds that you are talking about being on/in streams/currents and Virroilla is more vague vicinity of currents/streams which is more fitting for being also on dry land instead of just in the streams/currents. Ahvenanmaa in Finnish could be translated as "land of the perch" so saying Ahvenanmaassa would be in the ground of/country owned by a perch while Ahvenanmaalla is being in the area where there are perch.
So Thaimaassa is in that logic in a country owned by Thai people rather than Thaimaalla where there would be just random Thai people around.
The most common reason for using lla/llä for a place is that it is named after a river or wetlands etc. You are not IN the river, you are BY the river.
Niemi means peninsula. In Keitaniemi you are ON the peninsula, but in Rovaniemi, you are really just somewhere around some peninsula that is just a tiny part of what is now called Rovaniemi. Again, you are BY Rovaniemi.
Ahvenanmaa is a bit different, but I guess it's just because the area is loosely defined. It could be the main island, or the archipelago around it. Hence you are just in the general area, just as with Rovaniemi.
Niemi also mean a cape, a smaller hook of land. And the analogy is closer to being on something or being in something. And as Rovaniemi is a larger area than just a specific cape, you are "on" Rovaniemi, but as Hakaniemi, Keilaniemi are specific capes and known points you are "in" Hakaniemi. It's a different thing if you in the plane = Lentokoneessa, or if you are on the plane = Lentokoneella like some mechanics may be. Tampere is another exception to the rule of being in the City.... Jyväskylässä, Turussa, Oulussa, but Tampereella. You are on the Tampere ground, because if you'd be Tampereessa, you'd actually be in the Tammerkoski river/rapids, that give the name to the City. I suppose you don't want to be in that river? You are not suicidal, are you? Same goes to the Uusimaa. Rather be walking on it than buried in it..?
Internal cases are used for original settlement names like towns and countries.
External cases are used when a settlement is named after an existing terrain feature.
Uudessa Kapungissa- original city name. Uudella Maalla, since the territory was named before it became an administrative province.
Names of terrain features take external case.
eg. Britanniassa Britannialla = in UK in Great Britain
I had no idea. I have much to learn...
Generally, If you are talking about a geographical locattion or a derived place name like niemi, you normally use adessive cases, like Rovaniemellä. There are exceptions, however, like "asun Lahdessa", but you should say "soudan lahdella" instead. Confusing, really.. Good luck! 👍🏼
I used to live in Tohmajärvi.
If you say "Tohmajärvellä", it means the place (or town)
If you say "Tohmajärvessä", it means in the lake called Tohmajärvi
Yes. I guess in the end you got the point. Often it is about local history how people define it. Helsinki person buys ticket to RIIHIMÄELLE, but Riihimäki person buys it to RIIHIMÄKEEN.
That's an interesting example! :)
We Finns don’t always know those place names either. Many years ago, I spent some time in Riihimäki (Riihimäellä) but over time learned that the locals say Riihimäessä. There is a place next to Oulu called Kempele, and I always thought it was Kempeleellä (like Simpeleellä?) but no, it is Kempeleessä. Which btw sounds a little like a mild expletive. 😅
That's good to hear lol
I have heard from some local that there is one place where that has some sense. Kontiolahdella means inside the municipality, but Kontiolahdessa means that you're in the central town of that municipality.
I have heard the conjugation is what locals have started to use. That's why even us native Finns don't always know.
Exactly this. I get the feeling that names of places in Finland are not strictly following literary rules and logic, but instead they have been more freely adopted by the local population and over time established as the official way.
Most of these you learn through accumulated experience by reading news etc. but especially in case of smaller, less known places it's best to ask the locals lol
There are some smaller local oddities like Valkeakoski, which you can refer to as Valkeakoskella OR Koskissa (but NOT Valkeakoskissa!).
There's even more annoying thing locally here - Kangasala.
My Finnish non-local ear says "Kangasalalla", but the locals say "Kangasalla". Kangasalalta -> Kangasalta.
When visiting Kaustinen, you don't go to Kaustisille (logical Finnish, am I right), but to Kaustiselle. Imatralla / Imatrassa.
Apparently there is no real set rule on what is correct, but the local use takes presedence in these cases. Sometimes there are two "acceptable" ways to say the place name even among the locals.
Järeää salapoliisityötä (mysteerimusa oli hauska lisä)! According to legend, people in Finland heard about this other language that not only had had two different alphabets but also a symbolic glyph table of thousands of iconic characters, which can be read in many different ways, according to context. In view of this genius act of trolling, Finnish people wondered how on earth could they top that. In the end, they gave up as it would take unnecessary amounts of irrational work and just added as many conjugations and exceptions randomly pretty much everywhere. It is still unknown if we managed to win the golden trophy.
Funnily I have seen this error in actual(local) newspaper articles in Finland too, so it makes sense to me that non-native people can get confused with the way the names of different towns are declined.
A few years ago there was a motorcycling accident near Lavia(a small town east of Pori), close to where I live, and the people who were part of it were from a different town called Luvia(a slightly bigger town south west of pori) and there was an article on the local newspaper of Luvia where they incorrectly used the term Lavialla, instead of Laviassa because Luvia happens to bend as Luvialla.
So even when two towns are relatively close to each other it is possible to not know how names of said towns are supposed to be declined.
Ofcourse this is all because the names of the towns evolved separately from each other and because of this the ways you refer to the towns also evolved locally.
I like the mysterious feeling of the video, it's like a detective story! Haha that's the finnish language ;)
Yeah I'm being a detective here :D
I've never really thought abt that as a Finn, but now that I watched this video I realized how confusing and weird it can be :DD to be honest sometimes I'm not even sure how some of the places are supposed to be said either haha
When place names gradually shift from meaning a geographical entity into a regional entity, like "Lauttasaari" (a ward in Helsinki), or the mentioned "Hakaniemi", they change their inflection from external to internal cases. Some names may currently be in transition, and there are accordingly different opinions about how they should be inflected.
It really does not matter if you just say "minä asua hakaniemi" because its still understandable as a Finn as long as you understand finnish language. But big appreciations for you to trying to really learn Finnish!
Yeah but tbh knowing only kirjakieli is not useful in a daily conversations with friends.
@@DAIKIFinlandLife But that's the point in a way, you'll learn by making mistakes. You already speak very good Finnish from what I've heard on your videos, so don't complicate it too much.
Regarding the daily conversations with people from Helsinki, some of the words aren't even Finnish. For example a tram can be called spåra/spora (however you want to write it), which comes from Swedish word spårvagn. So my advice would be to just throw yourself in to the conversations and asks your friends and colleagues to correct you if needed. I don't think any sensible person will give you hard time for trying to speak Finnish as a foreigner :)
Well it matters.
I understand you want to be courteous but the harsh reality is that it is easier to find a job / make good friends when you do not speak like a caveman. Nothing wrong with making mistakes though.
You have to know grammar to express complex thoughts in a coherent and understandable manner.
There is a KOTUS article that brushes on this called "Paikannimien taivutukseen ei ole oikotietä" and it could be succinctly summarized as "Finns cant decide because they are stubborn village fools" but yeah... it depends
resource wise KOTUS has a web service called "Asutusnimihakemisto" where you can look for the name of a place and it shows you the typical usages
EDIT: kielikello has an article on the names starting with an adjective called "Uudellamaalla, Vanhassakaupungissa ja Pitkälläsillalla" that could be summarized as: your original hypothesis is correct. Adjective starting compound names for places should be in concord...... except ever since the 70's not conjugating the adjective has become more and more popular : ) ... it depends once more
The desperate WHY? at 3:38 made me laugh so hard, I almost choked on my coffee. On behalf of the Finnish language, I apologize 😂.
So now you explain it to me lol
@@DAIKIFinlandLife sorry, but the truth is, that the Finnish language defies all explanations
1:08 Almost spit out my water laughing when the guy on the youtube video told me he was going to kill me. Tip from a native speaker: Avoid using the word "tavata" (to meet) in the "tapaan" form until you can speak like a native. Even native speakers occasionally mishear it as "tapan", which means "I will kill".
You did pronounce it correctly, but since foreign speakers typically have a lot of difficulty with our lengthened vocals, we're used to always look for mislenghtened vocals to better understand what they're saying. "Tapaan" is also really uncommon in spoken language, so that one's particularly dangerous.
I’m impressed your knowledge of Finnish language! These are not the only strange things in our language.😅
Because our language is full of exceptions, Finns will immediately hear if you are native or not. Even my good friend (who speaks fluent Finnish) sometimes uses a ”wrong” end in the word (her first language was not Finnish).
Thank you!
I like your methodic approach. I almost stopped mid-video to write a corrective comment, then you explained it in much better way than I understand it. Thank you for the video.
One thing about the "uusi" and "vanha" thing is that when I think about the way that I conceptualize the words in my head, the "uusi" and "maa" in "Uusimaa" feel like two separate entities. Same for "Vanhakaupunki", although it's more clear for that since it's sometimes spelled "Vanha Kaupunki" (not the Vanhakaupunki in Helskinki, just a general Vanhakaupunki in any city). With "Vanhakartano", it sort feels like a single entity for some reason.
One more example: Mustameri (Black sea) would be "Mustallamerellä"
This is just a wild guess but I think the cases depend on if the name has a compound meaning or if you treat is as more of an abstract name. Ahvenanmaa is literally the land of the bass, if you said "asun Ahvenanmaassa" it sounds like you're living below the ground, not on top of it. While Thaimaa is just a translation of Thailand, Finns don't think of Thailand as land of the Thai, it's just a name for a country.
i think that also explains a bit of the confusion about the adjective and the vanha thing, because when you say vanhassakartanossa, it sounds a lot like you're refering to an actual singular mansion, where as vanhakartanossa sounds more like its an abstract name of a place. for most of the uusi names its basically the same principle but since the individual words aren't usually so clearly mixable (like uusimaa (which if you were actually refering to 'new land' would be written uusi maa) doesn't change from a general area into a very spesific building etc when you change in like that (uudellamaalla). but yeah most of the ssa/ä vs lla/a stuff is purely out of convention, and that could apply to the adjective stuff too
Maybe it's the other way around? "Thaimaassa" is more like "in the Thai-country", not "Thaicountry", while "Ahvenanmaalla" is "in/on the Bassland", not "Bass-land". We don't think Ahvenanmaa being the Land of the Bass, it's just Bassland. Thailand on the other hand is Thai-land or Thai-country, a country belonging to the Thai people.
In August will be fully my first entire year in Finland, and I just got even more confuse with the finnish language XD I'm seding you a hug hahahahaha
I think you got it, the way you say it is defined by the people using it, and it sometimes just depends on what sounds better 😅 my favourite is Töölö, some twist it to Töölöössä, when it's clearly Töölössä!! But because its "mennään Töölöön" its also sometimes "Töölöössä". This is a question for the ages!
That is because many think it is "Töölöö". Töölö is a funny name as we do not know what it means or even what language it is. It is a relic of languages spoken in Finland before Finns came i.e. over 3000 years ago.
I seem to remember from my ancient school days that the main thing is the local usage, custom. I'm not sure if I remember the case correctly but for example my "language ear" screams to say "Laukaalla" but supposedly it is "Laukaassa" for some peculiar reason etc
Very interesting! I guess you just have to remember and learn as you go.
Koulussa = inside school
Koululla = at the area of the school
Not really "koulussa" means you are studying there.
tää on ihan todella samaistuttava ja hyvä video! kiitos!
In most cases, Hungarian country names get -ban/-ben (inessive), with the exception of Hungary and most countries which lie on an island (Iceland, Madagascar, Sri Lanka etc. but not Japan nor Indonesia) which get -n (superessive). What names of settlements get, is historically associated with being inside/outside [pre-1920] Hungary. However, there are a lot of exceptions. In many cases, historical Hungarian settlements get -n and non-Hungarians get -ban/-ben, but there are a lot of exceptions. More to say, there are the relicts of the old locative case (-t/-tt): Pécs --> Pécsett, Kolozsvár --> Kolozsvárt.
rovaniemessä would be some small place, but Rovaniemellä it means the rovaniemi the big place. Somehow thats what my heart tells me. Hakaniemessä because hakaniemi is just small part of it. Same goes for Uusimaalla because its the bigger place. When you are on something big its LLA but when you are on your small car its autoSSA. But then again Liikun bussilla, Olen nyt bussissa. Not actually sure about it all myself here :D Good content!
This is something you just have to know. It's the same for us natives. We say them wrong as well occasionally if the place is not familiar for us
The names of places have their own old traditions, that's why they don't have strict rules. Uusimaa is very special and weird. It's literally "New Land", so you are *on* the land, and a new one for that matter. It's just tradition. The grammar rules have been thought out after the names have been formalized. ;)
Also, there is the most special case of Valkeakoski. Everyone in Finland uses "Valkeakoskella", except people living there; for some reason they use "Valkeakoskessa". For an outsider that sounds like they are living in the river rapids that go through the small town (valkeakoski = white rapids). 😄
Finnish spoken language and names are 1000-500 years old and the grammar has really been thoroughly formalized only during the last 100-200 years. The first written Finnish was 500 years ago. But the language itself has been very static for almost a millenium. The written Finnish is mainly based on western and especially Häme dialects, which have been very static and clearly articulated all the time.
People living in Valkeakoski don't say Valkeakoskessa. They say "Koskissa". For example: asutko sä Koskissa? If you translate that directly it means: do you live in the Rapids? Also, a person who lives there is called "koskilainen" . I think it is used more like locally.
But if you say: asun Valkeakoskella, it is quite right and understandable, ...but people who live there often prefer saying "Koskissa".
@@ilonapeck7022 I stand corrected, the version I've usually heard is "Koskisa nääs!" ;)
@@max_ljv 😊👍
This was a really interesting video. I had never really thought about that, it just comes naturally.
Sometimes, both ways are acceptable. For example, "Kontiolahdessa" and "Kontiolahdella" are both valid conjugations. There's a place north of it called "Juuka". People often say "Juukassa", but it's "Juuassa". Sometimes, you just have to learn things. There's no real logic behind it.
Juuka is juuassa for same reason vaaka is vaa'alla. some snobs liked it better when language was formalised.
I love your logic here. In many points of this video I was about to give explanation or example but you instantly handled everything I was about to say 😂 I was like "well, how about Vanhakaupunki" and POW you just destroyed my arguments, very nice
Daiki, I have a lot of empathy for you to learn a hard language.
Are you confident that you can pass the language requirement to be a permanent resident in Finland?
I'm sending you my best wishes and all the best!!
Actually the language requirement is only for getting citizenship. I don't need to take a language test to apply for a permanent residence permit.
These are just something you try to memorize. Realistically, it's impossible to remember the correct grammatical case for each small town and suburb.
I can confuse you more with neighborhood names that end with ”taka” like Vedentaka or Kankaantaka. Officially, if you are in Vedentaka -> olet VedentaaSSA. But what locals really say is VedentakaNA or KankaantakaNA. 😅
It's Uudellamaalla because uusi (new) is an adjective that directly describes the place (new land). Kalasatama or Seinäjoki don't have adjectives that directly describe the place.
So when you have an adjective in a place name, it usually also changes which turns Uusimaa into Uudellamaalla. Hope this clears it up.
Your knowledge of our language is amazing! Keep up the good work!
Thank you for cheering me up!
Interesting to here your opinions of our language.
Your pronunciation is really good
Your issues with Finnish cases are similar to my issues when picking the Japanese postpositions で and に. Picking either one can change the meaning of the sentence.Of course, Finnish grammar is way more complex, and noun declension is hard for anyone whose mother tongue doesn't feature grammatical cases. My mother tongue has cases, but only 7- I'd still have to study hard to get used to the Finnish 14.
haha fair enough!
The word "outo" in "Outokumpu" does not mean "odd" or "strange". It is actually a modified form of "outa", meaning a forest-covered hill. Thus it is a noun, not and adjective.
I did not know that, interesting!
Hearing you say that you've been to Åland/Ahvenanmaa caught me off guard. I hope you liked it here, it's always fun being mentioned because it's so rare.
Isn't it because Ahvenanmaa is many islands and Uusimaa is many cities that we say ~lla, maybe😅. Vantaa is a river also, Vantaassa therefore means you are in the river Vantaa. As you Daiki noted, we just "know" but it's through the natural language learning process. It's the same with the o/go honorifics such as why is it "o-sushi" not go-sushi.. please explain that. Also, "vanhakaupunki" - I'm the same as your friend- we don't know how to conjugate unless we ask a local. Another example is "Laukaa", it's Laukaalla but only because the local people decided so. Anyone would naturally say "Laukaassa" otherwise. I don't know if Laukaa is a lake or whatever, but lesser known place-names are not something you naturally know how to conjugate. Luckily those are just exceptions to the rules, and the Finnish language can maintain its function 👌 🎉😅
I'm sorry but Laukaa is definitely Laukaassa 😅 Best regards, a Central Finland local
In finnish the names of places or the names for the residents of different cities like "Helsinki - Helsinkiläiset" originate mostly from how the residents themselves call the place they are from or how they describe themselves as the people of that said city. There are are many places where the "correct" term for the residents is unclear and no one can really say what is the correct way like a person from Seinäjoki can be "Seinäjokelainen" or the more common "Seinäjokinen". Both of these are grammatically correct and I think most of these points you brought up in this video are the same way. I think you can use most of these and it will be grammatically correct either way but the residents from these places are the ones who make the last call of what is the "correct" way.
Although this doesn't really explain why Thailand is the way it :D
Interesting observations! I wonder if there is an underlying logic to it all (probably not :)
As a Finn I admit that's weird with those endings without any obvious logic. However in French one also has the same situation in some country names. Usually countries have an article, like Finland is La Finlande, Sweden is La Suède. However Denmark is Le Danemark. So you just have to know by heart which one is masculine or feminine.
I'm not a 100% sure about this explanation as I don't have a Finnish teacher close to correct me, so take this "info" with a grain of salt, but as a native speaker I have gotten the picture that the -ssa or -ssä is most of the times used in areas that are originally named after a terrain point (such as niemi-niemessä, mäki-mäessä etc., but not with joki-joessa or other watery places where it sounds as if you are in the water:D) but are nowadays populated by a lot of people and the place in nature isn't as important as it is as an area for people to live at now. This "logic" is often used with parts of the city/town as being part of a bigger entirety such as the city/town. (as -ssa/-ssä implies being inside a boundary of some sort, -lla/-llä emphasizes being on top of the terrain point) Here comes the peculiar part for the foreign learner. Rovaniemi-Rovaniemellä and other cities such as Tampere-Tampereella make exceptions with the rule depending on how the words roll on our tongues (and on our ancestors tongues who have come up with these rules:D) and how the words are wanted to be expressed figuratively as. This exception is mainly made with cities and states, cause they themselves are the "bigger entirety" and might have wanted to be known as a place with the people living on the place in nature such as a hill, cape, mountain etc. (Being on top of the terrain point is emphasized with -lla/-llä) or just as a larger area where a lot of people live in (hence the -ssa/-ssä), but these rules about how it's supposed to be said have formed a long long time ago when the cities have been established (Rovaniemellä the -llä is for the purpose of making it seem for others that the citizens are figuratively living on a terrain point, a cape to be exact and not just in a widely populated area around the cape)
For example in Pori there is a place called Isomäki which is widely known for its icehockeyarena where Porin Ässät play, it's figuratively nicer sounding to say that the arena is on the hill than it is just being loosely somewhere in the area around the hill. (an important location for the city with the terrain point wanted to be emphasized) an example sentence, Porin Ässien halli sijaitsee Isomäellä, -llä being the nicer sounding than -ssä for the native speaker
Thank you for your explanation!
To be honest you deserve more recognition at least among the finns, your knowledge in finnish in exceptional.
Thank you!
This is a really good insight on Finnish grammar! I learned a lot from your video :)
I think it’s important to remember that language is flexible, and the purpose of grammarians is to describe not prescribe. In other words, I think uusi- and vanha- are treated by most people as attributes to the name, not yet fossilised in the name. However, that town’s name (vanhakartano) is in the process of fossilisation. It’s always very interesting to look into edge cases.
Speaking of confusions about Finnish cases, I have one - ilmoittautua
It’s ilmoittautua kouluun / yliopistoon, but ilmoittautua kursille
I have yet to find any good explanations other than just memorising them.
Thank you for watching and your comment!
As a native speaker, the way I see it is that '-Vn' is more direct in the sense that it means being inside, while in contrast '-lle' is more indirect in the sense that it means more just like being around (or other such looser association). Another difference is that '-Vn' can be maybe a bit more "metaphorical", referring to things in abstract, as a concept, or in their entirety, and in contrast ''-lle' is a bit more down-to-earth.
For example "Tule kouluun" ("Come to school") could be an order for a missing classmate to come and attend school, while "Tule koululle" ("Come to/by the school") would be just asking them to come to or by the school without assumptions about the reasons, maybe just because they want to hang out at the school yard or something.
Likewise, "Ilmoittautua kouluun" ("To enroll into a school") refers to the school as a more immaterial and abstract organization (that you're also "entering into"/joining), while "Ilmoittautua koululle" ("To check in/register with/tell the school") means that you're just communicating with the school as an organization made of people, like when you're telling that you're sick or signing up for an event or something.
As with "kurssi", school courses are seen as something that you attend to, and not something that you "are inside of" so to say. While "Ilmoittautua kurssiin" is acceptable and gives the exact same information as "Ilmoittautua kurssille", it does give a little bit more intense sort of vibe, when all you're doing is just regularly attending lectures that follow the course's teaching plan. You have a loose association with "kurssi", you're not a part of it itself.
Native speaker would not see the meaning change by swapping "kurssiin" with "kurssille" in most use cases (i think), but if you're talking about a course more directly like "Muutoksia kurssiin" ("Changes to the course") the first one is better, while if you're talking about it more indirectly like "Kurssille osallistuvat" ("Course participants") the second one is better.
@@misterZalli Thanks a lot for your insight! Nuances as such can be confusing for learners, yet so difficult to find good explanations in textbooks. Kiitos paljon :)
I can confirm that there isn't any waterproof logic that works in any cases. Eventually it is about the opinion and tradition of the local residents. I am from place called Laukaa, and many finnish people say naturally "Laukaalla", like "Vantaalla", but correct way is Laukaassa, and the only reason is because we laukaalaiset say Laukaassa 😁Laukaa is such an old world, no one even knows what it means, so there isn't any hint in the meaning
Hi, the names of municipalities, towns and other settlements should be used in the way they are used by the locals. Asutaan Laukaassa, mennään Enontekiölle, ollaan kotoisin Ylitorniolta ja vieraillaan Hikiässä. Even a name that looks the same can be used differently in different places. An example is Torittu: Toritussa (Orivedellä), mutta Toritulla (Padasjoella). So, don't worry too much about how to correctly use the names of places. Sometimes the wrong usage may sound a bit funny (asun Seinäjoessa, are you living in a river??), but it doesn't really affect the understanding.
I've never really thought about it but yeah, it makes no sense xD It's kinda like how English pronounciation is inconsistent. Languages are really complicated so there's always gonna be some illogical stuff you can only learn by trial and error.
Place names is one of those things that often doesnt follow the grammar rules but is rather based on tradition and how the locals would say the name of that town. Even as finns we often get wrong places that we are not familiar with.
This is a valid observation of Finnish practice over the technical grammar. I find the item counting words in japanese to be a very similar thing.
True, that must be hard for those learning Japanese!
My short advide: don't worry about it! :) As you gain more experience, you inevitably will know more of the toponym-locative-trivia, and what's more important, your sense of "ownership" of the language will grow. For example, I as a native speaker feel no problem in sometimes saying "uusimaalle" instead of "uudellemaalle", because it's still grammatically correct, and less cumbersome, and everybody will understand it. Only if I were to write some very official document or give a speech in a formal setting, I'd make sure that I write or speak according to every "arbitrary" convention too.
You just need to learn them. Finnish people also can't deduce the correct one unless they know. There are some very special ones: usually -nen changes into -sissa (to plural inessive) or -silla, but Kaustinen -> Kaustisella. And of course Kangasala -> Kangasalla (not Kangasalallla).
Terveiset Kangasalta! Kadunnimet ovat myös mielenkiintoisia. Voi olla Kasarmikatu tai Kasarminkatu; Nurmintie tai Nurmenkatu.
I was wondering if rovaniemi was a district and hakaniemi a town, would the endings still be the same or would we actually use hakaniemellä and rovaniemessä. And if rovaniemi would have a district also called rovaniemi, would you then say rovaniemellä rovaniemessä. Ssa/ssä usually tends to mark specific place: mä oon täällä/mä oon tässä (I'm over here/I'm right here.) Just thinking.
If i recall correctly the endings of place names change depending on if it was founded as a city/town or if it was a place which people visited and had named before anyone lived there. I'm guessing Rovaniemi was already named before anyone lived there while a place like Hakaniemi was named as the district was built. If Hakaniemi was a place with no inhabitants, you would say Hakaniemellä instead of Hakaniemessä. That said it doesn't really make it less confusing which one to use 😅
Super finnish skills. Thanks for explaining these weird logic (or lack of it) even to a native finn.
Holy crap you pronounce Finnish well, good job! Puhut suomea tosi hyvin. (Finnish version of "Nihongo jouzu desu") :D
When I was young and I need to got to school I found those "rules" ver confusing. I'm native speaker and it was easy to learn to write etc. BUT those rules in suomi! O man, I don't understand that rules in language are not same as rules in math. Teachers speaks about rules and when I think I understand certain rues there was exception, always. I think that I'm stupid because those rules were so confusing. :) In math you need to obey certain rules and there is no exceptions. It takes long time to me to understand that "rules" in language are just "kind of rules" with more exceptions than just certain rules.
I've been studying finnish on and off for several years now, focusing mostly on the morphology. Just the inflection of uusi in itself is a good example: first, it's an i final nominal which is not a loanword, so its inflection stem is obtained by changing i into e. However, before i came s, which is incompatible with e in this context, so it must change to t (s/t being one out of four consonant pairs acting in this way, the others being n/m, k/h, and s/h in the word mies). So the inflection stem is uute, but the ssa suffix starts with two consonants, thus weakening any weakenable consonant(s) between the inflection stem's two final syllables, t in this case. A single t has weak form d, and so we finally have the complete inflected form: uudessa.
Unfortunately, there are some exceptions to the i/e swapping rule, kaupunki being one of them. It might be because kaupunki is an old loanword from proto-germanic, but äiti also doesn't swap its i, and I'm pretty sure it's not a loan, so idk. It's one of those things that you probably have to learn by heart, just like with your location examples. Same goes for the inflection stem of certain s words. Some follow a clear pattern, like adjectives swapping s for a vowel extension (kaunis > kaunii) and ordinal numbers where s becomes nte (kahdeksas > kahdeksante). Even nominalizations ending in two vowels plus an s can generally be figured out if you know their etymology: vastaus is derived from vastata (a verb) and becomes vastaukse, while vapaus comes from vapaa (an adjective) and becomes vapaute. I still haven't found any logic for nouns ending on a single vowel plus s. According to wiktionary, kirves behaves like kaunis, while ilves behaves like vastaus. No idea why. It's annoying, cause I've spent a lot of time making this very neat hyper-condensed inflection key which handles the vast majority of finnish nominals and verbs, but due to little inconsistencies like these, it will never be 100% perfect :P
You can always say, if someone ask you where you live, like: "Asuinpaikka on Helsinki (Riihimäki, Rovaniemi etc)
Never noticed this before and could not imagine ever having any difficulty conjugating the name of a town, so I thought there must be some rule, even if silly. After trying both ways for some real cities, and some fake ones, I came to the conclusion that both are acceptable, although accepting the wrong one for a well known place takes some serious mental gymnastics.
I will therefore endeavor to use the wrong form whenever I can, just to get the chance to argue that it's just as correct as the established form, no matter what Kotus says.
Here is a couple things that came to mind. You are very good at Finnish and learned a lot! Even that the language has many logical things I recall this confusing me in school (I am bilingual). Learning by heart is the best way to learn how to end locations correctly. Not sure if other people have mentioned yet but one special thing with Finnish language is that it has not existed as written for long and it is based on the spoken language. This is why everyone has a dialect where they bend their words differently than they are written. So some rules can't apply to everything since names have come with people and not the text. -LLA is at a place and -SSA is in a place. The words don't always follow this rule sadly. I want to add one thing to -maa. Maa can mean both land or country but also ground. I recommend looking up area rules on the web there are special cases but they apply to most things. Paikannimet taivutus are great search words.
You're right. Place names include hidden extra information. You can't know for sure how to conjugate if you only know the basic form. The correct form should be considered local knowledge and mistakes tolerated.
ssa = in (precise).
lla = around (less precise), typically used for bodies of water.
(vanhakartano)(ssa) implies "vanhakartano" is an old established name, and it would be rude to break it up.
(vanhassa)(kartanossa) implies "vanha" is an extra qualifier. I don't know either which one is right.
Yeahhh it's just you know... some preferences that were somehow decided upon or just came about
Adjective is a good quess. It usually worksi. In Tampere there is Mustalahti, Mustassalahdessa. IPitkäniemi (in Nokia), Pitkässäniemessä. But, of cause, Korkeasaari, Korkeasaaressa.
Outside Jyväskylä is a small town named Laukaa. Not even people born and raised there can agree if it's Laukaassa or Laukaalla. So it's not that easy.
Every inflection has its logic, but they are often forgotten through time. -lla and -ssa can depend on where a train station historically was in a place, or where it is located in relation to water or wetland.
Outo in Outokumpu comes from an old word _outa,_ which has its origin in the Sámi word for a forest, _vuovdi._ Therefore it is not an adjective.
Whether an adjective is inflected depends on if it is thought of as a descriptor or not.
About the case of "Vanhakartano"
I think if you say "Olin vanhassa kartanossa" it wouldn't point to the place Vanhakartano specifically, but just an old mansion (vanha kartano) somewhere.
If you say "olin vanhakartanossa" it would imply that specific area. _(I also didn't know this was a place btw lol)_
Vanhakartano in this form would be a so called erisnimi or proper noun. If you were talking about an old mansion that you went to, you would say "olin käymässä vanhassa kartanossa".
I have a couple of friends that are from Kangasala. So you would think that when you say you live in Kangasala, it is "Asun Kangasalalla", but according to them it is "Asun Kangasalla". I have no idea why it is that way.
I think the difference between Rovaniemi or Hakaniemi etc. might be that, Rovaniemi IS a city and Hakaniemi is a place/area in a city.
native finns also get placename conjugations wrong sometimes so don't feel bad about yourself if get them wrong
we just know the ones by heart which are huge places or places where we have lived
I agree with you. Our language needs some serious fixing. I hate when Finnish is not working logically. I always have. I know that some (most) of those oddities have historical reasons why they're not following the logical convention. The word used to be different back in history and it was conjucated just fine back then. But then the word changed but the old conjucation stayed, even though it should've changed.
And all that's all perfectly understandable, because spoken language can be quite conservative. But we should be able to change that now. To me Finnish should be as logical as possible. We can't really change to spoken Finnish at will, but we can at least change the standard Finnish and ultimately, with time, the spoken Finnish too.
Village = Kylä -> Kylässä, -ssä or -ssa.
Area = Ala -> Alalla, lla or llä.
That helps little bit. Is it village or area (with many villages)?
Regarding the inflection of uusi, I would say that it is indeed because it's an adjective. But I can't explain why this doesn't go for all adjectives in compounds.
As you might know, the cities of Turku, Tampere and Helsinki have some fraternal rivalry in the citizens' attitudes towards each other. Hence, me being from Turku, I sometimes talk about this little stinging joke about the tensing of place names: The countryside "maaseutu" tenses as "maaseuduLLA/maaLLA", and town/city "kaupunki" tenses as "kaupungissa". Thus urban locations tense with "SSA" (Turussa, Helsingissä, Porissa) and rural locations tense with "LLA" (Mynämäellä, Vehmaalla). The joke here is that "Tampere" tenses as "TampereeLLA".
But there might possibly be some truth behind this, as Rovaniemi is less densely populated place than "Hakaniemi", and "Ahvenanmaa" also is rather spread out, unlike what I think to be a somewhat densely packed "Thaimaa". Also, in "Ahvenanmaa", the part "maa" really means more like "the land of Ahvena" instead of "the kingdon/realm/country of Ahvena", whereas "Thaimaa" is "The country of the Thai people".
However, I would officially be saying that it is just based on what the (local) people have decided, as I'm not a proper linguist, and that is what I have been told by the people who are proper linguists.
Asun suomessa ja on hauskaa katsoa esimerkiksi juuri tälläistä sisältöä. Osaat kyl hyvin suomea👍
Seinäjoell*a* without umlaut, btw :D Next, try to figure out the inflections for Kaustinen and Virrat...
As finn i was wrong in many examples u gave, i think the trick is to be confident enough when saying those endings so nobody corrects u as they wont know it either
That's a good trick!
7:45
There's one example missing here to remind you things can never be simple:
New Zealand, New Guinea, New York.
Uusi-Seelanti, Uusi-Guinea, New York.
Country names vs. city names.
I think most of the time it doesn't really matter if you use -ssa(inessive) or -lla(adessive). But if you say for example: Turulla instead of Turussa, it sounds like Turku has something instead in Turku.
If the place name comes from river/lake/cape its usually lla/llä but not always 😂
Hakaniemi is Hakaniemessä because its a cape part of an island
About words new uusi and old vanha
Uusimaa is Uudellamaalla because its not a real compound word its only writen that way because its a place name but vanhakartano is a real compound word so its vanhakartanossa
I live in Uusikaupunki and I am finn and yes I have sometimes wondered this same thing. When you say kaupungissa and when you say kaupungilla. Kävelin kaupungilla or kaupungissa. There is diffrence but even I speak finnish I just cant make the rule, I guess somehow you just feel it. Btw Uusikaupunki is often shortened "uki" and then you say ukissa which is kinda funny because there is a word "ukki" which means grandfather and is too "ukissa" but it would then mean "in the grandfather" My former boss official title was "Uudenkaupungin kaupungin kaupunginpuutarhuri. " I dont even try to translate that!
new subscriber here from Philippines. i've been to finland in 2017 winter time and 2018 in summer. i visited my daughter who married finn.
Thank you for subscribing!
@@DAIKIFinlandLife kiitos for sharing your life and experiences. im still watching your previous vlogs. kinda vlog marathon.
Jotenkin tulee sydämelle asia, jos asut Hakaniemessä, asut Helsingin sisällä, Hakaniemessä, jos Hakaniemi olisi Helsingin ulkopuolella, se olisi erillinen asia😂 Myös se, jos olet töissä Keilaniemessä, olet se paikan ns keskellä/keskiössä/sisällä ja samoin Munkkiniemen kohdalla, nämä paikat, eivät ole kaupunkeja, vaan yksittäisiä paikkoja. Rovaniemi taas on kaupunki ja siksi suurempi kokonaisuus ns. Rovaniemellä ollessasi voit olla sen kaupungin laajemmalla alueella, kuin vain kaupungin osassa. Jos sanoisit olevasi Rovaniemessä, se kuulostaisi sille, että olisi tarkalleen yksi ainoa niemi, tarkka paikka. En osaa edes sanoa, onko Rovaniemellä yhtä sen nimistä niemeä? 😂 Jotenkin täytyy osata hieman myös maantietoa, jotta ymmärtää, mistä puhuu🤭
Jos ei halua tehdä yhtään virheitä, pitää opetella ulkoa. Siis jos paikoista puhutaan. Tampereella, Porissa, Rovaniemellä, Valkeakoskissa. Oikea tapa on se mitä paikalliset käyttävät.
@@m1k1a1 Ei Valkeakoskissa, vaan Valkeakoskella tai Koskissa. Nämä molemmat ovat oikein, mutta "Koskissa" on lähinnä paikallisten käyttämä, ja ehkä usein vain paikallisesti, tai paikallisten kanssa. Jossain muualla päin käytettynä voi jopa jäädä epäselväksi, mitä sillä tarkoitetaan. Esim. jos joku koskilainen sanoisi vaikka Kuusamossa olevansa "Koskista", niin kaikki eivät ehkä tietäisi, että mistä.
Kuulostaa monimutkaiselta 😂
@@ilonapeck7022 Totta. Kirjoitin väärin halutessani korostaa, että kyseessä on Valkeakoski. Koskeja on Suomessa useita, siksi on esimerkiksi Varsinais-Suomessa kunta Koski Tl. Kunnan kotisivulla esimerkkilause: "Kosken seudun yläaste on seutukunnallinen yläkoulu, jossa oppilaita on Koskelta TL, Marttilasta, Loimaalta ja Salosta." Olenkin yhä vakuuttuneempi, että suomen kielen taivutussäännöt on kehitetty kolmen promillen humalassa.
@@m1k1a1 😂
This video goes very well to the point why Finnish is really hard. One of the better videos I've seen about the subject.
This video pretty much explains why I can't teach Finnish, because it comes naturally to me and I have to think hard about why certain things are said in that way, because it comes to me too naturally and I can not explain it cohesively. Ole of my personal gripe is the term used, 'Seinäjokinen', instead of 'Seinäjokelainen'. And a lot of other localities.
wouldn't someone from seinäjoelta be seinäjokilainen? some finnish grammar is just about how letters flow when spoken. reason it is kengässä and not kenkässä.
edit. one fun thing is. i went on a scale. kävin vaa'alla. again vaakalla does not flow nice.
@@samikatto2851 It should be 'seinäjokelainen' with e instead of i, but it always isn't dialects are strange sometimes.
I do not know why it is so, it just is. When bending names related to water, i often changes to e. Eg. 'Äänekoskelainen' instead of 'Äänekoskilainen'. Koski is a rapid. Applies to järvi, koski, joki, niemi, lahti, maybe some others.
If you know some Finnish, this is something that will really bother some people, before they remember "Mistä ruisleipä on tehty?" the correct answer is "Rukiista.". If you don't know/remember it, it can really start bothering you, because if you try to use logic, one would think the answer is "Ruiksesta" or "Ruissista" and both of those sound and feel so wrong.
This is such a confusing topic that even Finnish linguists aren't quite sure why this is the case. In general, Finnish _should_ have congruence between an attributive adjective and the noun its referring to, as is the case with Uusimaa/UudeLLAmaaLLA. This congruence happens with a little over half of Finnish place names, although that number appears to be shrinking every year and becoming like Outokumpu where the adjective is not in congruence with the noun. Basically its language evolving and becoming more simple, a process that is accelerated by the fact that even Finns don't tend to know how to inflect certain place names. I think in general, the older and more famous a place is, the more likely it is to have that congruence because of that older grammar becoming universally formalised.
Would be interesting to hear how Finnish linguist would explain it :)
@@DAIKIFinlandLife I mean, if you are curious, you could try to email someone at a university Finnish department. Most linguists would probably be delighted to answer the question!
Finnish and Estonian both really went overboard with cases. Too many ways to conjugate stuff.
Learning Japanese now, and I can't even put into words how happy I am that Japanese is a much more logical language. Kanji difficulties aside, the sentence structure is infinitely easier. You figure out the core logic and you can learn to say pretty much anything.
Good luck with Finnish! がんばれ!
Most native speakers struggle with these as well. I would've said Rovaniemessä as well.
some of these rules are just a bit artbitrary and more based on what "feels right" over something that's correct or universally agreed upon. in fact from my intuition there's a few cases where I disagree with your friends. Similarly I'd probably say Papua-uusi-guineassa as well. maybe part of that is dialectical or generational differences too. the vast differences in accent and vocabulary in different dialects and even from town to town really is enough for me to say that there isn't really just one right Finnish, its just that we vaguely agree on what sounds good and what doesn't and roll with it
as an addendum, big part of this kind of learning is just building up the intuition for these details. you can't really become a native level speaker by memorising them (though I suppose sometimes that's really your only option for some things, even native speakers have to). you have to sort of learn what "feels right". its much easier of course with your native language, but its definitely possible for languages you learn later in life too
You make some very good points in this video. Frankly, I don't understand the declinations of "Uudellamaalla" and "Uudessakaupungissa", either, since it is one of the fundamental grammatical rules of Finnish language that only the last word declines in compound words. That is why I decline them as "Uusimaalla" and "Uusikaupungissa", regardless how the locals decline them.
Rules just describe things. There always are exceptions. "Uusimalla" is a valid form but then you are talking about the newspaper.
@@okaro6595 Rules do not always have exceptions. I have a board game, Ludo, without a single exception in its rules.
It is by not a fundamental grammatical rule. There are several compound words where both parts are declined, like omatunto ("hyvällä omallatunnolla"). Previously words like isoveli also were declined like "isollaveljellä" but nowadays many seem to say "isoveljellä".
Always hilarious to me when someone points out these language oddities, when as a native i would not even notice them. But hey do not worry, we finns struggle with our language too. Greetings from / terveisiä Vanhakartano....sta
haha thanks for watching this video from Vanhakartano....sta😂
This is just my own observation but -ssa is usually used in smaller geographic areas and bigger more densly populated places because it implies more exact place. And -lla is used for geographically bigger places because it implies more vague area.
Thanks for your observation!
I guess with these kind of situations it is just better to abandon all reason and just go with the feeling. If you ask people to correct you when you make a mistake you will gradualy aquire the right feel for it. Or you will go mental from all the corrections, either or.
Don't forget how Turku changes to Turussa. You need to know to drop the letter K 😄
Also if you want to say in Great Britain, you can say Isossa-Britanniassa or Iso-Britanniassa. I believe it is 50/50 which one people use.
Turku -> Turussa is a famous one so I know that :)
Isossa-Britanniassa on oikein, Iso-Britanniassa on väärin, ja sillä siisti!
I say just "Britanniassa", much simpler.
Those street names with person's name are really difficult ones
I would say vanhassakartanossa or if i am currently there vanhallakartanolla but i think it goes either way too