  The moods and tenses of the Finite verb in Finnish are very simple. The present and imperfect with the compound tenses called perfect and pluperfect form the entire indicative mood. I. The present indicates— (1) An habitual action, or an action which is going on at the present time. Joka pÄivÄ hÄn lukee sanomalehden alusta loppuun saakka, every day he reads the newspaper through from one end to the other. Mihin menette? Menemme metsÄÄn, where are you going? we are going to the wood. When it is desired to emphasise the fact that some one is engaged in an action at the present time, such phrases as he ovat kalastamassa, they are fishing, may be used (v. p. 191). (2) A future action, as we say ‘he comes to-morrow.’ Some distinction is made between these two uses by the fact that while a verb representing an action as going on always takes an object in the partitive, a verb which represents an action as to be completed in the future takes an object in the genitive. Kirjoitan kirjettÄ, I am writing a letter; huomenna kirjoitan kirjeen, I shall write a letter to-morrow. Kun saan tietÄÄ missÄ asuu, niin menen hÄnen luo, when I know where he lives I shall go and see him. (3) In a few expressions the present indicative is used in a concessive sense. Maksaa mitÄ maksaa, cost what it may. Sano mitÄ sanot, say what you will. II. The imperfect is used in two senses:— (1) It denotes an action in past time, either habitual or isolated, either continuous or momentary; it thus corresponds to several past tenses in other languages. Seuraavana pÄivÄnÄ tuli nuori rouva aamiais-pÖytÄÄn, kun muut olivat lopettaneet, next day the young lady came down to breakfast when the rest had finished. Tapasitko sisartani? did you meet my sister? En tavannut, I did not meet her. Joka pÄivÄ lÄhti hÄn kÄvelemÄÄn pÄÄkadulle, every day he took a walk in the principal street. Lohi loimahti merehen, the salmon jumped (2) It is also used like the present in a concessive sense, but much more frequently than that tense. KÄvi miten kÄvi, asiaan on ryhtyttÄvÄ, come what may, the business must be begun. Oli kumpi hyvÄnsÄ, whichever of the two it is. Cf. such expressions as kuka niitÄ kaikkia muisti? Lempo niitÄ ymmÄrsi. It is noticeable that in the narrative portions of the Kalevala and other poems the present and imperfect are used almost indifferently (v. extracts at end of book). Perhaps the sound of the terminations pi and vi, which, like the imperfect, end in i, made the confusion easier. III. The perfect corresponds pretty nearly to the tense formed with the auxiliary have in English. Olemme maanneet vÄhÄn aikaa niin lÄhdemme jÄrvelle koko yÖksi, we have slept a little and are going out on the lake for the whole night. Oletteko ennen kuulleet sitÄ laulua? have you heard that song before? En ole nÄhnyt hÄntÄ moneen aikaan, I have not seen him for a long time. IV. The pluperfect expresses an action finished in past time, and may be rendered by had in English. Kun hÄn sen sanonut oli, meni hÄn taas ulos, when he had said this he went out again. Oliko hÄn ehkÄ saanut tiedon asiasta? had he by any chance heard of the matter? It will be observed that there is no real future tense in Finnish. Its want is supplied in several ways. A. By the present tense as described above. B. By a periphrastic conjugation consisting of the present participle and the present or imperfect of olla. This corresponds to the Russian future with ????, and denotes a future action the time of which is not specified. Ennenkuin pÄivÄt tulevat C. By the concessive. This tense is frequently used to imply something probable or doubtful in the future. Ostanevat kaupungista kirjat ja tuonevat ne jo huomenna kotia, they will probably buy new books and bring them home to-morrow. Tappaneeko hÄn itsensÄ? (S. John viii. 22) will he kill himself? D. By the conditional, especially in conditional sentences. Tulisin huomenna, jos ehtisin, I shall come to-morrow, if I have time. IsÄntÄ ei palkitsisi sinua ennenkuin olisit tyÖsi lopettanut, your master will not pay you before you finish your work. E. Various periphrases are used, particularly when there is any idea of necessity or obligation in the future. The following examples taken from the translation of the Bible will show this. MinÄ saan nÄhdÄ hÄnen, mutta en nyt, I shall see him, but not now (Num. xxiv. 17, but the passage continues minÄ katselen hÄntÄ waan en lÄstÄ). TeidÄn pitÄÄ minua etsimÄn, ye shall seek me (S. John vii. 34). SillÄ ei sitÄ pidÄ unhotettaman heidÄn siemenensÄ suussa, for it shall not be forgotten out of the mouths of their seed (Deut. xxxi. 21). Autuaat ovat siviÄt sillÄ he saavat maan periÄ, blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth (S. Matt. v. 5). The Concessive.This mood represents an action as possible, and is particularly used in questions, or in sentences introduced by such particles as ehkÄ, which imply a doubt or question. It has two tenses. I. The present, implying a potential action in the present or II. The past, implying a potential action in past time. HÄn lienee luullut minua toiseksi, he probably thought I was some one else. Ei liene sinua luotu Ison tammen taittajaksi (Kal. ii. 145), thou art probably not created to break the mighty oak. LieneekÖ hÄn arvanuut ketÄ puhutteli? did he know with whom he spoke? The Conditional.The conditional mood has two tenses, the present and past, which denote an action dependent on certain conditions in present or past time. It is used:— (1) In conditional, comparative, and concessive sentences, both in the protasis and apodosis. When used in the sentence introduced by jos, or some similar particle, the present implies that the condition is not yet realised, and the past that it has not been. But this distinction is not always observed, the present being used of a condition not realized in the past. Jos menisitte tÄssÄ myrskyssÄ jÄrvelle niin hukkuisitte, if you were to go on the lake in this storm you would be drowned. Parempi olisi ollut Ilman impenÄ eleÄ, it would have been better to live as the virgin of the air (Kal. i. 161). Jos varani myÖntÄisivÄt niin matkustaisin ulkomaille, if my means allowed me I should go abroad. Kukapa ... kÄkiÄ The word jos is sometimes omitted and replaced by the interrogative suffix -ko after the verb. Kal. xi. 95:—Nauraisitko Saaren naiset, PitÄisit pyhÄiset piiat, Niin siitÄ tora tulisi, Sota suuri lankeaisi, were you to seduce the maidens of the island a quarrel would come of it and a great war fall on us. (2) In final sentences to express the object of an action. Ilmoittakaat minulle ettÄ minÄkin tulisin ja kummartaisin hÄntÄ (S. Matt. ii. 8), bring me word that I may come and worship him also. Kirjoitan hÄnelle ettÄ hÄn toimittaisi sen asian, I am writing to him that he may undertake the affair. Olkaa hiljaa, lapset, ettÄ saisin rauhassa tyÖskennellÄ, be quiet, children, that I may work in peace. Ava suusi suuremmaksi ... pÄÄsisin mahasta maalle (Kal. xvii. 583), open thy mouth ... that I may come forth from thy stomach. (3) In temporal and relative sentences when the temporal particle or relative involves some idea of purpose, capacity, etc. En tahtonut ruveta kirjoittamaan ennenkuin saisin varman tiedon asiasta, I did not wish to write before I received certain news of the affair. PÄÄtin lakkauttaa kauppaliikkeeni kunnes ajat paranisivat, I determined to close my business till the times should be better. Sen mÄ mieheksi sanoisin, Urohoksi arveleisin, Joka jouseni vetÄisi, KiverÄni kiinnittÄisi. (Kal. xxvi. 357). N.B. The conditional is used only if the principal verb is in a past tense or conditional. (4) In Oratio Obliqua. a. After verbs of wishing, asking, commanding, etc. KÄske ettÄ palvelija valjastaisi hevosen, tell the servant to get the horse harnessed. Tahdotko ettÄ se heti tehtÄisiin? do you wish it to be done at once? b. To represent the imperative in the Oratio recta. IsÄntÄ sanoi ettÄ rengit menisivÄt pellolle, the master told the servants to go to the fields. HÄn viitasi ettÄ he vaikenisivat, he motioned to them to be silent. (5) As a polite form of statement, request, or question, from which, as mentioned above, it often comes to be used as a future. MinÄ luulisin ettÄ hÄn ostaisi talonne, I should think he would buy your house. Voisitteko kertoa minulle? can you tell me? Tahtoisin puhua kanssanne, I should like to talk to you. NÄyttÄisitte minulle, please show me. EnkÖ saisi ...? can I have ...? Menisitte noutamaan yhdet hyyryvaunut, please go and call a cab. (6) To express a wish with such particles as jos, jospa, kunhan, etc. Jospa hÄn tulisi! if he would only come! Jospa olisin tietÄnyt! had I only known! Kunhan tuttuni tulisi! if my friend would but come! Imperative and Optative.Though these moods are given as two in the Accidence on account of the slight difference in their form, they may be treated as one syntactically, as they supply one another’s deficiencies, the imperative being only used in the 2nd sing. and 1st and 2nd persons plur., and the optative only in the 2nd sing. and the 3rd person singular and plural. In poetry a 2nd pers. plur. optative ending in otte is occasionally found. There is no difference between the meaning of the two in 2nd person singular. The imperative expresses:— I. A command or request. LÄhe nyt kanssa laulamahan, come to sing with me (Kal. i. 14). Toki tullos toinen kerta, come again (Kal. v. 137). KÄy pian vÄlehen jou’u, go quickly and finish the business (Kal. l. 211). EllÖs menkÖ II. A condition. Sano mitÄ sanot, en siitÄ kuitenkaan vÄlitÄ, you may say what you like, but I don’t care. Teen minÄ sen vaikka hÄn kieltÄkÖÖnkin, I shall do it, even though he forbid it. The Passive.The passive, as has already been mentioned in the Accidence, is impersonal. KÄytetÄÄn means there is a using, or one uses, people use. The clearest proof of the real character of the form is to be found in the fact that the verb substantive olla, to be, has a so-called passive. Examples:—Niin kohta kun ollaan tultu, as soon as people come. Ennen oltiin terveempiÄ, people were healthier formerly. Siihen oltaneen tyytyvÄisiÄ, this will probably prove satisfactory (people will be satisfied with this). JÄrvellÄ oltaessa tuuli kovasti, while they were on the lake, the wind blew violently. (1) The passive of ordinary verbs is used absolutely; that is to say, no noun is connected with it as subject or object. Koulussa kirjoitetaan ja luetaan, they read and write in the school. HelsingissÄ huvitellaan paljo talven aikoina, there is much amusement in Helsingfors in winter time. Suomen jÄrvissÄ ja joissa kalastetaan, people fish (or there is fishing) in the lakes and rivers of Finland. (2) As the above examples show, the passive represents the action of a verb without designating the agent. It is not unnatural that such forms should be used in an imperative or optative sense, for the second singular of the imperative is simply the root of the verb. It is true that the imperative is the closed root, due to the loss of k, but like the passive it has no sign of person. This use of the passive for the imperative is particularly common in dialects, though it is also found in the literary language. Its usual meaning is ‘Let us.’ MennÄÄn sisÄÄn, let us go in. Luetaan, let us read, or it’s time to read. LÄhdetÄÄn kotia, we ought to go home. MennÄÄnkÖ jalan vain ajetaanko hevosella? Shall we go on foot, or take a carriage? (3) This use of the passive for the imperative is important as explaining the common use of the form with a nominative case. Such a phrase as mies tunnetaan can be correctly translated as the man is known; but there is no doubt that the nominative is really the object of an impersonal verb, which naturally remains invariable, whatever the noun is. Now the object of the imperative is also put in the nominative and not in the accusative, though both in the case of the imperative and the passive it may be put in the partitive, if partial. It would seem that in these forms of the verbs, where the agent is not denoted by any suffix, it was felt that the sense was sufficiently clear without adding any termination to the noun to mark its exact relation to the verb. The object of the passive, as above stated, can be either in the nominative, if total, or in the partitive, if partial. a. Nominative. Koira ajetaan huoneesta ulos, the dog is sent out of the room. Palvelija lÄhetetÄÄn viemÄÄn kirjettÄ postiin, the servant is sent to take a letter to the post. Hevoset valjastetaan, the horses are being harnessed. Ruis kylvetÄÄn syksyllÄ, rye is sown in the autumn. KeskellÄ yÖtÄ sammutetaan tulet, the lights are put out at midnight. TÄssÄ sodassa tapettiin viisikymmentÄ tuhatta miestÄ, fifty thousand men were killed in this war. b. Partitive. Miksi sanotaan sitÄ Englannin kielellÄ? What is that called in English? Jos ei aleta varhain, niin ei tyÖtÄ saada aikanansa valmiiksi, the work won’t be ready When the personal pronouns are used with the verb, it is commoner, particularly in speaking, to put them in the accusative ending in t, e.g. minut, sinut, hÄnet nÄhdÄÄn, is more usual than minÄ, sinÄ, hÄn nÄhdÄÄn. But the form with the nominative is not only grammatically correct, but found in writing, especially in the Bible, e.g. Rom. viii. 36, Sinun tÄhtes me kuoletetaan yli pÄivÄÄ: me pidetÄÄn niinkuin teurastettavat lampaat, for thy sake we are killed all the day long: we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Similarly 2 Cor. xi. 36, Kuka pahoitetaan ja en minÄ pala? Who is offended and I burn not. SillÄ he ravitaan, for they shall be filled, S. Matt. v. 6. EttÄ te heiltÄ nÄhtÄisiin, that ye may be seen of them, S. Matt. vi. 1 The conjugation of a passive form contains not only the strictly impersonal forms, like luetaan, people read, luettiin, people did read, but also compound tenses formed with the past passive participle which stand grammatically upon a different footing. For the participle in question is a simple adjective (or substantive), and such phrases as kirja on luettu, kirjat ovat luetut are exactly analogous to kirja on hyvÄ and kirjat ovat hyvÄt. In some cases, however, double constructions are possible: one can say either kirjat eivÄt ole lÖydetyt, the books have not been found, which is a simple adjectival construction; or kirjoja ei ole lÖydetty, in which the construction with the participle is assimilated to that with the other forms of the verb. Infinitives.The five infinitives of the Finnish verb play a great part in the syntax, and are often used to express the subordinate sentences (temporal, final, etc.) of other languages. The simplest way to understand their many uses is to recollect that they are equivalent to an English verbal ending in ing, such as cutting. Now a word like this is a noun, but it can also have an object, e.g. cutting the wood, and it can be also combined with a substantive or pronoun indicating the agent, e.g. my cutting the wood or the man’s cutting the wood. Such expressions as my cutting the wood is unavoidable, during my cutting the wood, or without my cutting the wood are intelligible in English, though not idiomatic; but they are the literal translation of the Finnish idiom. In other words, the infinitive is a noun capable of declension in certain cases and of being combined with a genitive or personal affix to mark the agent. As it is also a verbal noun, it is likewise capable of being combined with a second substantive to mark the object of the action. Thus nÄhdessÄnsÄ minun pÄivÄni is literally ‘in his seeing my day,’ that is when he saw. The use of the fourth infinitive is slightly different. In the phrase Minun on tÄmÄ kirja lukeminen, I should read this book, it will be observed that the object is in the nominative. This is because the literal meaning seems to be, This book is a reading for me, though it must be admitted that the negative form Ei ole minun tÄtÄ kirjaa lukemista does not lend itself to this explanation, and can only be explained by supposing it is due to analogy. The object of the other infinitives is mostly put in the partitive, Infinitive I.The first infinitive has two forms, one with the translative termination and always used with a prominal suffix; the other with no case termination and used without a pronominal suffix. A. The longer form with the suffix is used to express the purpose of the action of the main verb, and is rendered in English by in order to or by a simple infinitive. Antakaa vettÄ juodakseni, give me water to drink. This is of course literally give me water for my drinking, and is exactly analogous to the use of the same case of a noun in the sentence, Juon vettÄ terveydekseni, I drink water for my health. It is important to notice that the pronominal suffix always indicates the subject of the action denoted by the infinitive, and not the object, though in translation it is often necessary to invert the sentence. For instance in S. John vii. 19 and 20 the questions ‘Why go ye about to kill me? Who goeth about to kill thee?’ are rendered Miksi te etsitte minua tappaaksenne? Kuka sinua etsii tapaaksensa? literally Why seek ye me for your killing? Who seeks thee for his killing? Me pyysimme venettÄ soutaaksemme, we asked for a boat to row in. MenkÄÄmme tuolle vuorelle katsellaksemme jÄrveÄ, let us go up that hill to have a view of the lake. Tahdon lukea laskun nÄhdÄkseni onko B. The fact that the last syllable of the shorter form of the first infinitive is closed shows that it has undoubtedly lost a letter or syllable. It is probable therefore that the short form is not really the nominative from which the translative is derived, but a translative which has lost its termination. Cf. luo, taa for luoksi, taaksi. The employment of the form is also agreeable to its origin, for its manifold uses, as given in grammars, may be summed up in the formula that it defines the meaning of verbs, adjectives, and substantives; that is to say, it expresses that towards which an action tends, which is one of the uses of the translative (p. 159). Such phrases as voin, tahdon, tiedÄn lukea, I can read, wish to read, or know how to read might be expressed as I have power, will, or knowledge for reading. In some cases the use of the translative and this infinitive are obviously analogous. Ei sovi suuttua, it is not fitting to be angry. HÄn sopii sotamieheksi, he is fit for a soldier. Ei minun kelpaa juoda vettÄ, it does not suit me to drink water, can be also expressed in the form, Vesi ei kelpaa minulle juotavaksi (or juomaksi). The short form of this infinitive never takes suffixes in The subject of the infinitive, which in the longer form is denoted by a suffix, is in the case of the shorter form either not expressed at all in such a phrase as IsÄ antoi kirjan pojalle lukea, the father gave the boy the book to read; or it is put in the genitive. IsÄ toi kirjan pojan lukea, the father bought the book for the boy to read, literally for the boy’s reading. The short form of the infinitive is used:— (1) As the subject of impersonal verbs like tÄytyy, tulee, kelpaa. Paha koira tarvitsee tappaa, one ought to kill a bad dog. TÄytyy kÖyhÄn kÄrsiÄ, pitÄÄ kiittÄÄ pÄÄlliseksi, the poor must endure and give thanks into the bargain (proverbs). Sinun tulee puhua totta, you must speak the truth. In this use two constructions are possible. One can say either talossa pitÄÄ olla isÄntÄ, the master must be in the house, or IsÄnnÄn pitÄÄ olla talossa. In this latter case the fact of the obligation affecting the person is emphasized, while the sentence with the nominative means rather, the master’s being in the house is necessary. (2) As the complement of the verb olla combined with an adjective or substantive. Se kirja on hyÖdyllinen pojan lukea, this book is useful for the boy to read. Ei ole aikaa lÄhteÄ, it is not time to go. PyyntÖsi on mahdoton kenenkÄÄn tÄyttÄÄ, your prayer is impossible for anyone to fulfil. TÄmÄ kuorma on raskas sinun kantaa, this burden is hard for you to bear. On vaikea sanoa, it is hard to say. (3) It is used to define the meaning of verbs. Talon mies ei osaa lukea, the farm servant does not know how to write. Alkaa sataa, it begins to rain. Laiska lapsi ei tahdo oppia, a lazy child does not want to learn. HÄn ei ymmÄrrÄ puhua, he does not know how to speak. En voi tulla, I cannot come. HÄn saa odottaa, he can wait. Aiotko viipyÄ tÄÄllÄ, do you mean to stay here. Sallitteko minun mennÄ? do you allow me to go? Klaus lÄhteÄ lupasi, Klaus promised to go (Kanteletar). (4) It is used much like the longer form to express the object of an action. Tuo kala muidenkin katsella, bring the fish for others to see. Panen maata, I am going to bed. Onko teillÄ hevosta myÖdÄ? have you a horse to sell? Arvelevi miten olla kuin eleÄ, he considered what he should do, how he should live. There is another use of this infinitive, when it is employed with a verb of kindred meaning in an adverbial sense. This use is very frequent in the Kalevala and poetry and occasionally found in prose. It is to be noted, however, that the infinitive generally represents what would be the principal verb in ordinary language, while the verb in the indicative indicates the manner in which the action is performed. Thus such a phrase as astua taputtelevi, means walking he stamped or he stamped as he walked. HÄrkÄ kÄyÄ kÄllerÖitti (Kal. xx. 43), equivalent to astui keveÄsti; cf. Astua lykyttelevi, KÄyÄ kulleroittelevi (Kal. ii. 165). Waka vanha WÄinÄmÖinen Ajoa karittelevi (Kal. viii. 18). Soutoa melastelevi (Kal. v. 41). Astua ajattelevi, KÄyÄ kÄÄpÄrÖittelevi. Polttaa tuprutteli havannaansa. The first infinitive is hardly ever used in the passive form, but the active form may be used with a passive verb or in sentences where our idiom would use the passive infinitive. Rautatie aiotaan rakentaa, the railway is meant to be built or The infinitive cannot be used with a negative on account of the peculiar character of the Finnish negative verb. For the various devices used to overcome this difficulty vide pages 193 and 219. Infinitive II.This infinitive is only employed in two cases, the inessive and the instructive. (1) The inessive expresses an action coincident in time with the action of the principal verb, and must be rendered in English by a temporal sentence, the subject of which appears in Finnish as a genitive, but where the subject of the principal and subordinate sentences are the same in English, the infinitive takes a pronominal suffix. Palvelijan tullessa kotiin, isÄntÄ lÄksi metsÄÄn, when the servant came home, the master went into the wood, or literally ‘on the coming home of the servant.’ Abraham teidÄn isÄnne iloitsi nÄhdessÄnsÄ minun pÄivÄÄni (S. John viii. 56), your father Abraham rejoiced to see (when he saw) my day. Ollessani teidÄn kanssanne, when I was with you. Astuessansa ahoa, SaloviertÄ vierressÄnsÄ kuuli (Kal. xliv. 77), as he went through the desert place, as he walked near the wood he heard. This infinitive is frequently used in the passive. Kaskea poltettaessa, while the forest was burning. Kotiin tultaessa ei ollut ketÄkÄÄn, on coming home, there was no one. Kal. iii. 245, EikÄ lie sinua nÄhty ... TÄtÄ maata saataessa, Ilmoa suettaessa, etc. The active infinitive is also used impersonally. Aika menee arvellessa, pÄivÄ pÄÄtÄ kÄÄnnellessÄ, time passes while one thinks, and the day while one turns one’s head (proverb). As the Finnish negative, owing to its peculiar character, cannot be used with the infinitive, a negative temporal proposition is rendered by the abessive or infinitive III, and the inessive of infinitive II. Lukematta istuessani, when I was not reading; literally, in my sitting without reading. (2) The instructive of infinitive II is used to express the manner in which an action is performed, and is generally rendered by a participle in English. If the subject of the infinitive is expressed (in which case it must be rendered otherwise than by a participle) it is put in the genitive. This form is not used in the passive. Astui huollen huokaellen, he walked sorrowing and groaning (Kal. v. 13). Muu seura vaikeni, jÄttÄen heidÄt kahden kesken sanaotteluun, the rest of the company was silent, leaving them to argue it out between themselves. Toisinaan sydÄmellisesti syleillen erosivat, after again heartily embracing they parted. HÄn ei ollut ollenkaan ruma nuorukainen, he was not at all a bad looking young man (literally, was not in his being). A few words, chiefly denoting perception, add suffixes to this infinitive. Sanoin sen heidÄn kuultensa, I said it in their hearing. HÄn teki sen rikoksen teidÄn tietenne, he committed this crime with your knowledge. Infinitive III.The substantival nature of the Finnish infinitives is most apparent in this form, for it is frequently used as a noun without any verbal signification, e.g. kuolema, death; elÄmÄ, life; sanoma, speaking or report. Such a sentence as kuvat ovat maalarin tekemÄt, which may be rendered either the pictures are the work of the painter, or, are made by the painter, shows the connection between the purely substantival and verbal uses of this infinitive. Its other uses are very various. I. It is used as a past passive participle. TÄmÄ kirja on isÄn antama, this book has been given by my father, or, is the giving of my father. MinÄ luen isÄn antamaa kirjaa, I read the book given by my father. As there is no real distinction between the noun and the adjective, this use of a verbal substantive as a participle is not unnatural. Kirjoittamassansa kirjeessÄ hÄn ei ollut puhunut mitÄÄn tÄstÄ, in the letter he wrote he did not say a word about it. Omat on virret oppimani, Omat saamani sanaiset. This infinitive is as a rule only used as a past participle when the agent is indicated, but in the Kalevala it is found used as simple past participle without a genitive or affix. Kal. i. 51, Viel’ on muitaki sanoja, Ongelmoita oppimia, Tieohesta tempomia, Kanervoista katkomia, Risukoista riipomia, Vesoista vetelemiÄ, PÄÄstÄ heinÄn hieromia, Raitiolta ratkomia. II. Most of the other cases of this infinitive are found used in a verbal signification. A. The case ending in n (which is considered by some grammarians as a genitive, and by others, with greater probability, as an instructive) is used with the impersonal verb pitÄÄ. Ei sinun pidÄ tappaman, thou shalt do no murder. HÄnen pitÄÄ oleman ankara, he should be firm. This form is also used in the passive. Lapset pitÄÄ otettaman mukaan, one should take one’s children with one. TyÖt pitÄÄ saataman aikanansa valmiiksi, the work should be got ready in time. B. The inessive expresses the action in which anyone is engaged. He ovat oleet jo kauan kalastamassa, they have long been fishing. HÄn on lintuja ampumassa, he is out shooting. Rupean kÄymÄÄn usein lukemassa englantilaisia sanomalehtiÄ, I shall often read the English papers. C. The elative expresses an action from which anyone ceases, or which is forbidden. He tulivat kotia kalastamasta, they came home from fishing. Milloin hyvÄnsÄ tuli huoneesen tapasi hÄnen aina lukemasta, whenever one went into her room one always found her reading (v. p. 145). HÄn kielsi lapsia riitelemÄstÄ, he forbade the children to quarrel. Jumala pelasti miehen hukkumasta, God preserved the man from drowning. D. The illative is used:— (1) After verbs, adjectives, and participles, which imply either literally or figuratively motion to perform an action (v. the uses of the illative given above). Mies meni jÄrvelle kalastamaan, the man has gone to fish on the lake. Neuvon teitÄ kÄÄntymÄÄn Herra V:n puoleen, I advise you to apply to Mr. V. Ruvennee tulemaan lunta, it will probably snow. Koko talo rupeaa palamaan, the whole house takes fire. HÄn ei ole tottunut sÄÄstelemÄÄn, he was not accustomed to live economically. Minua kÄskettiin menemÄÄn pois, I was ordered to leave. (2) From such uses the illative passes naturally into an infinitive of purpose. Tulin kysymÄÄn, I have come to ask. LÄhettivÄt palvelijat hÄntÄ ottamaan kiini, they sent servants to take him. Meni puhdistamaan itseÄnsÄ, he went to purify himself. Menemme puutarhaan juomaan kahvia, let us go to take coffee in the garden. E. The adessive has two meanings, corresponding to the two uses of that case in nouns. (1) With the verb olla it denotes an action which one is on the point of performing. The infinitive always takes a pronominal suffix in this use. Olen juuri lÄhtemÄllÄni, I am just going, literally, I am on my departing. Olin tekemÄllÄni tuhmuuden, I was on the point of committing a folly. (2) It expresses the means by which an action is performed. F. The abessive expresses an action without which the action of the principal verb takes place. It is very largely used in Finnish to express what is represented by negative sentences in other languages, on account of the restrictions on the use of the negative words en, et, ei, etc. It can take the pronominal suffixes. ViivyttÄmÄttÄ, without delay. Mies meni pois kenenkÄÄn huomaamatta, the man went away without any one remarking it. Sen asian tunnen sanomattasikin, I know that without your saying a word. HÄnen hyvÄsydÄminen isÄnsÄ ei voinut olla hÄnelle antamatta tulevaa perintÖÖsuutta, her good-natured father could not help giving her the part of her inheritance due to her. In examples like this the abessive of this infinitive (often with the verb olla) serves as a negative form of the other infinitives. Tahtoisin tulla, I should like to come; but Tahtoisin olla tulematta, I should like not to come (to be without coming). HÄn lÄksi minun nÄhteni, he went out while I was looking. HÄn lÄksi minun nÄkemÄttÄni, he went out without my seeing. This infinitive is also used in a passive sense, though not in a passive form. TyÖ on vielÄ tekemÄttÄ, the work is not yet done (lit. is without doing). In this sense it serves as a negative of the past passive participle. This case of the infinitive III is very common in the Kalevala. E.g. iv. 217, Parempi minun olisi, Parempi olisi ollut SyntymÄttÄ, kasvamatta, Suureksi sukeumatta, which is equivalent to, better had it been for me not to have been born, xliii. 417, Vihoin pÄivÄn paistamatta, Vihoin kuun kumottamatta, etc. Infinitive IV.The fourth infinitive, like the third, is used as a simple substantive. Se on parhain keino sen oppimiseen, that is the best means for the study of it. Viipymisesi on sinua paljo vahingoitanut, your delay has greatly injured you. There is also a use of this infinitive analogous to that of infinitive I mentioned above, p. 188. In order to express a continued action the verb is repeated in the partitive of infinitive IV with the pronominal suffix. VÄhetÄ vÄhenemistÄÄn, to grow less and less. Äiti kiivastui kiivastumistaan tyttÄrensÄ itsepintaisuudesta, the mother grew more and more furious at her daughter’s obstinacy. PÄivÄ alenee alenemistaan, the sun sinks lower and lower. The fourth infinitive is used verbally in two cases:— (1) In the nominative, as the subject to the verb olla in affirmative sentences. It then denotes the necessity or propriety of performing an action, the subject of which is put in the genitive. Minun on tÄmÄ kirja lukeminen, I ought to read this book, or literally, this book is a reading for me. MeidÄn on tottuminen siihen, we must get used to it. Tehty kauppa kiittÄminen, tekemÄtÖn tietÄminen, one should praise a bargain which is made, but enquire into one which is not yet made (prov.). Copious examples can be found in Kal. xxiii. 61, Tapa on uusi ottaminen, Entinen unohtaminen, etc. (2) The partitive is, agreeably to general rules, used in a similar sense in negative sentences, or interrogative sentences implying a negative. Ei ole minun tÄtÄ kirjaa lukemista, I need not read this book. Ei koiraa karvoihin katsomista, one must not judge a dog by his coat. Ei pojan isÄÄnsÄ opettamista, a son should not teach his father. In such phrases as minulla on vielÄ paljo sanomista, I have still much to say, the partitive depends on the word paljo, just as it does in such a sentence as paljo rahaa, much money. Infinitive V.This infinitive is only a diminutive form derived from infinitive III. As a rule, it is only used in one case, the adessive plural, to denote an action on the point of taking place (cf. infinitive III, E. 1). It always takes the pronominal suffix. Olin tyÖtÄ alottamaisillani, I was on the point of beginning to work. Juna on juuri lÄhtemÄisillÄnsÄ, the train is just going. Aurinko oli katoamaisillaan, the sun was just going to set. YhtiÖ on muodostumaisillaan, the company is on the point of being formed. Mies oli kaatamaisillaan puuta, the man was on the point of felling the tree. Participles.The participles may be called verbal adjectives, just as the infinitives are verbal substantives. But, as has already been observed, there is no clear distinction between adjectives and substantives in the Finnish language, and the participles are used substantively in many constructions, just as the third infinitive is used adjectively. They sometimes lose all temporal signification and become mere adjectives, as oppinut, learned; vÄsynyt, tired; mÄdÄnnyt, rotten. When used with a verbal meaning the present participles (part. I) indicate an action beginning or continuing, and the past participles (part. II) an action which is completed. The temporal signification is not very marked. It is noticeable that the passive participles have two distinct meanings, one impersonal like the rest of the so-called passive verb, the other distinctly passive. All the participles can be used— (1) As attributes or predicates. (2) To form the compound tenses of verbs in conjunction with the verb olla, after the manner already explained. Participle I—Active.This participle denotes an action taking place or which is to take place in the future, just as the present indicative represents both a present and future tense. LentÄvÄ lintu saa jotakin, istuva ei mitÄÄn, the bird who flies catches something: the bird who sits still nothing. Ei tyÖtÄ tekevÄ nÄlkÄÄn kuole, the man who works does not die of hunger. KysyvÄ ei tieltÄ eksy, he who asks does not lose his way. Hukkuva oljen korteenkin tarttuu, a drowning man catches at a straw (provs.). In the combination with the verb olla it has a future signification (v. p. 176). The essive of this participle is used with the verb olla to signify something pretended by the subject. In this sense it is often in the plural, though the subject itself is singular. HÄn on olevinansa (or olevanansa) oppinut, he pretends to be learned. HÄn on paljonkin tietÄvinÄnsÄ, he thinks he knows a great deal. HÄn oli lÄhtevÄnÄnsÄ eilen, mutta ei mennyt, he pretended he was starting yesterday, but did not go. So also it is used in speaking of dreams and hallucinations. MinÄ olin nÄkevinÄni, I thought I saw. Gen. xxxvii. 7, Katso, me olimme sitovanamme jalallisia wainiolla (of a dream); cf. Gen. xli. 17, Unessani olin minÄ seisovana. Words ending in ja as a rule correspond to English forms in er. E.g. rakentaja, a builder; that is to say they denote an action, like the present participle, but do not define the time in any way. Sometimes, however, they are used exactly like the present participle, e.g. Kal. xvi. 169, Se oli poukkujen pesiÄ Participle II—Active.The past active participle expresses an action, which has taken place at any past time. Ei ole vuoksen voittanutta, Yli kÄynyttÄ Imatran (Kal. iii. 182), there is no (waterfall) that has conquered the Vuoksa or surpassed Imatra. ÄijÄ on tÄnne tullehia, Ei paljo palannehia (Kal. xvi. 270), there are many who have come down here, not many who have gone back. AlkÄÄ hÄiritkÖ nukkunutta, wake not the sleeper. The translative singular of this participle is used in connection with the verb tulla to denote an incidental or chance action. HÄn tuli sanoneeksi, kertoneeksi ..., he happened to say in the course of conversation ... MennessÄÄn kaupunkiin tuli nÄhneeksi ..., as he went to the town he happened to see ... Puodissa kÄydessÄÄn tuli ostaneeksi uuden maton, in going round the shops he happened to buy a new carpet. Cf. Kal. ii. 149, Sai toki sanoneheksi, scarce had he said it. Olkoon menneeksi, it does not matter, or let that pass. Participle I—Passive.This participle has not a simple temporal signification, but has always an idea of desirability, or necessity. Kunnioitettava Herra, a man to be honoured. In combination with the verb olla it can be used either as a simple adjective, e.g. se on korjattava, that should be corrected, or as a part of the impersonal passive verb, sitÄ on korjattava. It is sometimes used with a genitive of the agent like the infinitive. SentÄhden oli etsittÄvÄ kahdenkeskistÄ yksinÄisyyttÄ, on this account it was The translative singular of this participle is used exactly like the illative of the third infinitive, but with a passive signification. SetÄ toi kirjoja lasten luettavaksi, the uncle brought books for the children to read (for the reading of the children). HÄn antoi veitsen hiottavaksi, he gave the knife to be sharpened. Participle II—Passive.This participle is really a substantive expressing the result of the verb’s action. From this it passes easily to an adjectival meaning. For instance, tyÖ on tehty, the work is a thing done, is much the same as the work is done. In combination with olla it is used to form tenses of the passive impersonal verb, and as such, can take an object, otherwise it has the same signification as the past passive participle in other languages. Puhuttu puhe ammuttu nuoli, a word once spoken is an arrow shot forth. Unhotettu maksettu velka, a debt paid is forgotten (proverbs). Jos mun tuttuni tulisi, if one known by me were to come. It is noticeable that when used in this sense the past passive participle does not as a rule take the pronominal suffix. Thus one says, ostettu kirja, the book that has been bought, but by preference, ostamani kirja, the book that has been bought by me. Part. II passive is also used substantively in the partitive singular to express an action antecedent to the action of the principal verb. As the original meaning of the partitive is motion from, this is very analogous to the use of the elative of infinitive III. Like other expressions of the same nature (e.g. the inessive of infinitive II) this use is rendered in English by a temporal sentence. The subject of that sentence is represented Jopa tuonne tultuansa, Matkan pÄÄhÄn pÄÄstyÄnsÄ (Kal. xlii. 25), after he had come thither and reached the end of his journey. Muutaman pÄivÄn kuluttua, after a few days. Luettuaan sanomalehtiÄ ja syÖtyÄÄn aamiaisen, after he had read his paper and eaten his breakfast. KÄvelyltÄÄn palattuaan, after returning from his walk. Juotuaan kolme, neljÄ lasia teetÄ, after drinking three or four glasses of tea. Sotamiehen kotiin palattua, when the soldier had come home. PÄivÄn laskettua, when the sun had set. As however this participle denotes a completed rather than a past action, it is sometimes used in cases where we have to translate it by a present participle. Kal. xvii. 593, Hyvin laait tultuasi, thou hast done well in coming. xlvi. 284, Terve, terve tultuasi (terve tuloa is a common expression), hail to thee in thy coming. These two examples show clearly the substantival character of the participle. Use of Participles in Oblique Oration.The participles have another use in Finnish—viz. they correspond to the construction known in Latin grammar as the accusative and infinitive in subordinate sentences. In other words, a subordinate sentence which in English begins with the word that (and some others), and which might in Finnish be represented by a similar sentence beginning with ettÄ, can be put in a shorter and more idiomatic form by: (1) omitting the word ettÄ; (2) replacing the finite verb by the genitive singular of the participle; (3) representing the subject by a genitive, partitive, or pronominal affix. Thus se luulee ettÄ hÄn tekee Jumalalle palveluksen, he thinketh that he doeth God service becomes se luulee tekevÄnsÄ Jumalalle palveluksen. The participle present is used in this construction when the action of the subordinate sentence is coincident with that of the principal sentence or future to it, and the past participle when the action of the subordinate sentence is anterior. He thinks he will receive the book, luulee kirjan saavansa. He thinks he has received the book, luulee kirjan saaneensa. Notice that a past tense does not require necessarily the past participle. HÄn luuli lintuja olevan metsÄssÄ, he thought there were birds in the wood. Here the present participle is used because the action of the two verbs is contemporaneous. The noun or pronoun which is the subject in the expanded sentence is put in the genitive when total, in the partitive when partial, and represented by the pronominal suffix when the subjects of the two sentences are the same. The participle remains in the genitive sing. whatever be the case or number of the subject. This use is more frequent in affirmative than in negative sentences, but there is no objection to such sentences as En luule voivani tulla, I do not think I can come, where the principal verb is negatived. It is however very rarely used when the verb of the subordinate sentence is negatived (vide p. 220 for some curious irregularities in this respect). Examples:—Kuin hÄn siis kuuli hÄnen sairastavan, when he heard he was ill. Luuletteko olevan mitÄ vaaraa? do you think there is any danger? MinÄ pÄivÄnÄ toivotte saapuvanne perille? on what day do you expect to arrive? En usko hÄntÄ nÄkevÄni, I don’t believe I shall see him. MinÄ luulen sotamiesten jo saapuneen leiriin, I think the soldiers have already gone to the camp. En usko palvelijan varastaneen rahoja, I do not believe that the servant has stolen the money. TiedÄn vieraita tulevan, I know that some strangers have come. NÄin vettÄ satavan, I see that it is raining. Kuulin laivoja tulleen, I heard that some ships had arrived.
become
But if the complement is a nominative singular it appears as a genitive singular when the subject is put in that case. Luulen ettÄ poika on ahkera becomes Luulen pojan olevan ahkeran. It is possible to still more abridge the proposition by rejecting olevan and putting the complement in the translative. Luulen pojan ahkeraksi. Tiesi hetkensÄ tulleeksi, he knew that his hour had come. Huomasin hÄnen menneeksi, I noticed he was gone. Kertoi veneen kaatuneeksi, he related that the boat had been upset (v. page 158). If the predicate of the subordinate sentence in the expanded form is a passive verb, the passive participle can be used in the genitive singular. The subject of such a proposition is always in the partitive. As a rule only part. I passive is used in the genitive, part. II being generally in the translative according to the construction mentioned above. TiedÄn hÄntÄ odotettavan, I know they are waiting for him. NÄin karhua ammuttavan, I see the bear is being shot at; but EpÄilen karhua tappetuksi, I doubt if the bear has been killed. Uskon metsÄÄ hakattavan, I think the forest is being cut down; but Uskon metsÄn hakatuksi, I think the forest has been cut down. These participal constructions are also employed when the SiinÄ makasiinissa kuulutaan saatavan oikeata kiinalaista teetÄ, this shop is said to receive real Chinese tea. Sanotaan varustettavan sotaretkeÄ, it is said that an expedition is being armed. Luultiin ihmisiÄ kuolleen, it was thought the men were dead. The intransitive verbs nÄkyÄ, to be seen; nÄyttÄÄ, to appear; tuntua, to feel; kuulua, to be heard, also take the genitive of the participle. HÄn kuuluu eronneen miehestÄÄn ja lÄhteneen Pietariin, she is said to be divorced from her husband and to have left for St. Petersburg. Et nÄy tuntevan vanhaa ystÄvÄÄsi, you don’t seem to know your old friend. Ei kuulu saadun kaloja, it is said no fish have been caught |
|
