Charles Eliot

“ In Finnish, as in most of the cognate languages except Hungarian and Ostiak (where however there are traces of another system) there is no simple negative particle, and negation can only be expressed by means of the negative verb, en, et, ei, emme, ette, eivät, which is prefixed to the closed form of the root. There is no doubt that this form has lost a final k, and is therefore identical with the second person singular of the imperative, and is the simplest verbal form. In the past, the past participle is used with the negative verb, and in the other moods the tense stem. ”

“ In the plural indeed the two forms are absolutely identical even in the modern language: tuovat, antavat, tulevat are either the 3rd person plural present or nominative plural of the participle present. The 3rd person is thus simply a predicate, the verb substantive being, as often, omitted. Pa or va would thus be in its origin a suffix of the present: pi or vi does not appear in any of the other moods or tenses, but vat is the universal termination of the plural. ”

“ Verrattuna meihin, on hän onnellinen, compared to us, he is happy. The verb vivahtaa, to be like, also takes this case: vivahtaa veljeensä, he is like his brother; but the original meaning of the word is apparently physical motion, to glance quickly by or into. By a similar idiom the verb tulla, to come, with the illative means to resemble. Hän tulee isäänsä, he is like his father. The use of the simple verb olla, to be, with this case to express likeness is however truly singular, and is apparently to be explained only by analogy. Lapsi on isäänsä, the child is like its father. ”

“ Not only the Finno-Ugric languages, but also Samoyede, Turkish, Mongolian, and Manchu, have this law at least in the rudimentary form that a root does not contain both hard and soft vowels; but there is much variety as to the degree in which the vowels of the suffixes are assimilated to those of the root to which they are added. The most highly developed form of the law is found in the Turkish dialects (particularly in Yakut) , where the vowels of the root and suffix must not only not be discordant, but are as much as possible assimilated to one another. ”

“ There is no need to insist on the close connection of Livish, Votish, Vepsish, and Esthonian with Finnish. The grammatical structure and vocabulary of these languages is so alike that the fact is obvious not only to a philologist, but to the most casual learner. Esthonian is now far the most important of these languages, and has a certain amount of literary culture. It has two chief dialects, that of Revel and that of Dorpat [3] .
In a few cases Esthonian shows older forms than Finnish, [xliii] but on the whole it is less primitive. Besides the Finnish consonants it possesses b, g, z, and ṅ. ”

“ The instructive, prolative, and comitative are generally used in the plural, even when one definite person is described, and there is no distinction between the singular and plural suffixes for the third person. Now, in some languages which appear to present the least developed type of the agglutinative principle, as for instance Manchu, the plural is not regularly distinguished from the singular, and though Finnish has advanced enormously beyond this stage, it appears to have developed a less acute sense of number than the Aryan languages. ”

“ So, too, kivet ovat kovat means the stones are hard; while kivet ovat kovia means rather stones are hard. It would, however, be misleading to state such rules too dogmatically, as doubtless many instances could be found where the use of the nominative and partitive would not correspond to that of the article in English. Naturally, a language which has no articles and no gender is obliged to construct sentences differently from tongues which have these distinctions, and Finnish sentences, particularly in the older and simpler literature, are generally more precise than ours. ”

“ The formation of the 3rd persons is quite different. The plural termination is vat. In modern Finnish the singular, as a rule, takes no termination, but merely lengthens the final vowel, if not already long or a diphthong. But (as stated on pp. 62 and 63) the termination pi, which is found in monosyllabic verbs, and in the weakened form vi in others, is frequent in dialects, and used sometimes in the literary language. This suffix appears in all the Baltic dialects in the forms b, p for the singular, and vat, ba, va for the plural. In Lappish it does not occur in the 3rd person sing. ”

“ The infinitive in Finnish is a real substantive, that is to say, just as from a verbal root can be derived, by the addition of suffixes, forms expressing person, time, and modality, so by the addition of other suffixes to the same root can be formed nouns, which can take the ordinary case terminations and also the pronominal suffixes. ”

“ A good many words expressing some state or feeling are used with the verb olla, and a genitive of the person who feels. Minun on jano, I am thirsty; minun on nälkä, I am hungry; minun on tarve, I must. Hänen on aika mennä, it is time for him to go. Similarly, Rikkaiden on velvolisuus antaa köyhille, it is the duty of the rich to give to the poor. Sotamiehen on pakko mennä vaaraan, it is the duty of a soldier to go into danger. In these latter sentences the genitive seems quite natural in our idiom, but they are really closely analogous to the phrases given above. ”

“ The negative verb for the imperative is ärä, ärgu, ärge, but in the other forms Esthonian does not affix personal endings to the negative, but uses ei with all persons. Similarly Livish has äb or ab for all persons except the second, where ad is sometimes used. Votish and Vepsish follow Finnish. It will thus be seen that Esthonian, closely allied as it is to Finnish, has lost many peculiarities which it once no doubt possessed, but occasionally (e.g. the passive present in takse and the conditional in kse) preserves forms which in Finnish have been weakened or disguised. ”

“ The subject of a negative sentence is put in the partitive, in cases where we should say in English,—‘There is not’ or ‘there is no.’ Ei ole täällä ihmisiä, there are no men here. In such a sentence as en ole merilohia, syvän aallon ahvenia (Kal. v. 122) , I am not a salmon, the partitive must be explained as indicating a class, I am not one of the salmons. In ordinary Finnish the partitive is only used in this way with determining adjectives. Thus one says, En ole vaimo, I am not a woman; but En ole niitä vaimoja jotka unhottavat miehensä, I am not one of the women who forget their husbands. ”

“ Parempi on nöyränä olla, it is better to be humble.
The superlative can be used either absolutely, or with some word depending on it in such phrases as ‘the greatest of kings’. Such a word is put either in the partitive or in the elative, with very little difference in the meaning. The elative, however, implies reference to a more definite class than the partitive. Suurin kuninkaita is greatest of kings; but suurin kuninkaista, the greatest of the kings.
Not only are adjectives and substantives declined in exactly the same manner, but the distinction between them is very slight. ”

“ Yli, meaning the place above anything, is used in various forms as a preposition or a postposition with the genitive.
a. Yli (1) as a preposition with the genitive expresses existence above an object; e.g. Pilvet liitävät yli meren, yli maan, the clouds glide over land and sea. Yli päämme on kirkas taivas, the bright heaven is above us. We also find expressions like kello on yli viiden, it is after five o’clock. It also expresses metaphorically pre-eminence. Hän on kunnioitettava yli muiden, he is more honourable than the rest. ”

“ Besides the forms of the finite active verb discussed above, Finnish also possesses what is called a passive, but is no doubt really an impersonal verb, used in all the tenses but the imperative. From the root tuo come the present tuodahan, imperf. tuotahin, concessive tuotanehen, conditional tuotaisihin. But the root ending in a short vowel like repi makes revitähän, revittihin, revittänehen, revittäisihin. In all these forms the last element is obviously a termination h-n, which is vocalized analogously to the illative. This is probably the 3rd personal pronoun hän or sen. ”

“ The illative shows a suffix -sen, but dialects give forms which represent he-sen or se-sen (which are supported by the analogy of other languages) , which may be explained as the characteristic of the internal cases plus a case termination. The allative -lle (n) may therefore be explained as l + hen, though it can equally well represent l + ne. The termination sen, which is weakened to h-n, or merely n preceded by a long vowel, is perhaps for ksen, for the termination [xx] of the translative has a great tendency to be weakened and even disappear (alas, ulos, taa, ty’ö, 1st infinitives, etc.) ”

“ The Finnish language is still in so unsettled and fluid a condition, as regards both forms and style, that it is often hard to say what is correct and what not. A foreigner naturally cannot venture to decide what ought or ought not to be, and I have merely endeavoured to give an account of the forms and constructions found in existence. The examples are taken chiefly from the Kalevala and Bible (which are generally cited by references) , from the Suomen Kansan [vi] Sananlaskuja of Ahlqwist, from various modern works, and some from the dictionaries of Lönnrot and Geitlin. ”

“ 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. ”

“ It is perhaps presumptuous for a foreigner to judge whether the result is successful. One is inclined to think that the change has been a little too sudden. Finnish is an admirable vehicle for such poetry as the Kalevala or for simple narrative. ”

“ But it must be remembered that the Finnish language is extraordinarily susceptible in regard to consonants. Mouths which are incapable of pronouncing two consonants at the beginning of a word must have to struggle with difficulties in pronunciation which we are quite incapable of understanding. ”

“ The inessive, elative, and illative are sometimes called the interior cases, because they express existence in and motion from or to the interior of an object. The adessive, ablative, and allative, on the other hand, are called the external cases, because they indicate rest on and motion from or into the exterior surface of an object. ”

“ When the loss of a vowel produces groups which are euphonically disagreeable, they are simplified; veitstä, kolmant, suurimp, säkenöitstä become veistä, kolmas, suurin, säkenöitä.
The second group of changes concerns the letters t, k, s, h. The group ti has always a tendency to become si in syllables which never had the accent. The letter h, which is suspected of never being original when a medial, represents t, k, and s. S between two vowels immediately before a termination always becomes h. Vierasa makes in the nominative vieras, a being lost owing to the accent being on the first syllable. ”

“ Tuo tyttö on kaunis, that girl is good-looking. Tuo ei ole oikein, that is not correct.
Se is used of the third person if anything but a human being is spoken of. Missä on koira? Se ei ole huoneessa, where is the dog? He’s not in the room. Ne kalat ovat pienet, these fish are small. Mitä pidätte siitä, what do you think of it? In popular language and in the Kalevala it is also used as the equivalent of hän. Se puhuu totta, he speaks the truth. Se mies joka paikkansa pitää (proverb) , he is a man who keeps his place. ”

“ The root was differentiated in various ways by changing a to o, u, i, e, etc., by raising it to a diphthong or long vowel, or by altering the consonants within certain limits. Examples of this development of roots are contained in Donner’s Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der Finno-Ugrischen Sprachen.
Finnish, like all the cognate languages, has no distinctions of gender. It possesses two numbers, the singular and plural, all traces of the dual which exists in Ostiak and Vogul having been lost. Three elements are used to form the plural—t, i, and loi. ”

“ 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. ”

“ Most of the terminations have two forms, one with a hard, one with a soft vowel. Roots with hard vowels take the hard termination, those with soft, the soft ones. Thus we find maa-ssa, but työ-ssä.
These fifteen cases are as follow:—
(1) The nominative has no suffix, though it does not always represent the pure root. In maa, land, the two are identical, but the roots käte, vete, vieraha produce the nominatives käsi, vesi, vieras.
(2) The partitive is formed by the suffix ta, tä or a, ä. ”