DETERMINING THE SUBJECTS IN FINNISH
The major determining factor for the subjects in Finnish is the word order although Finnish has a rich morphology system, the nouns decline and the verbs change their forms according to the person and the number of their subjects.
According to Andrews, there are three determining factors for the subject, cross linguistically, and they are the word order, the cross-referencing, and the case marking (Shophen 104). In Finnish, cross-referencing can be used in determining the subjects because, as stated above, the verbs change their forms according to the person and the number of their subjects. Taking the verb ëole-í (to be), for example,
auto on kadu ñ lla.
car- nom.sg. be-3s.pres. street-ade ëThe car is in the street.í
auto - t o-vat kadu ñ lla
car-nom.plu. be-3p.pres street-ade ëThe cars are in the street (Karlsson 62-63).í
We can find that the verb ëole-í changes according to the number of the subject. The verb ëole-í can take, however, the predicate, for which the nominative is also used.
paavo on oprttaja. (1)
Paavo(personís name)-nom.sg. be-3s.pres. teacher. nom.sg.
We can find another example, in which the subject-object agreement is ambiguous.
tytO-t nAk-i-vAt poja-t. (2)
girl-nom.plu. see-imperfect-3pl. boy-plu.-0(acc.)
In the sentence (1), both nouns in the sentence, ëpaavoí and ëteacherí are in the nominative, and neither the case marking nor the verb agreement help us determine the subject. In the sentence (2), the noun after the verb, ëboysí are supposed to be the accusative plural, which sometimes takes the same form as the nominative plural, and we cannot determine the case on the basis of the forms.
In these cases, then, the word order determines the subject, and, in many cases, the NP put in the preverbal position is the subject of the sentence. The basis word order for the Finnish sentences is SVO, and the English translation for the sentence (1) is, ëPaavo is a teacher,í and for (2) is, ëThe girls saw the boys.í
THE EXAMINATION OF THE SUBJECTS IN FINNISH
Although the word order is the key to determine the subject of the sentence, not all cases can be used as a subject. Those cases that can be used as a subject are the nominative, the partitive, and the genitive cases in Finnish.
Finnish nominative is very similar to that of English. Nominative singular is characterized in Finnish, as in English, by the use of the
bare NP, and the verb agreement when put in the subject position. The nominative subject expresses the definite and limited quantity while the partitive subject, which we will examine later, expresses the indefinite, non-limited quantity (Karlsson 77).
leipA on purki ñ ssa.
bread.nom.sg. be-3s. tin-ine ëThe bread is in the tin.í
lapse ñ t o ñ vat tAAllA.
child-plu be-3p. here(adv) ëThe children are here.í
ihmise ñ t kuole ñ vat.
people ñ plu die ñ 3p. ë(All) people die.í
As seen before, the subject of the sentence is placed preverbal position in Finnish. There are, however, some cases in which the subject is placed at the end of the sentence. In introducing a new, unknown topic, or expressing the indefinite meaning, the subjects are put at the end of the sentence.
auto on kadu ñ lla.
car.nom.sg. be-3s. street-ade ëThe car is in the street.í
kadu ñ lla on auto.
street-ade be-3s. car.nom.sg. ëThere is a car in the street.í
auto ñ n hankk ñ i nainer.
car ñ acc.sg. get-3s.imperfect woman.nom.sg. ëA woman got a car (Karlsson 62-63).í
We can, then, see that there are two options for the placement of the subjects, either at the beginning or the end of the sentence,
according to their discourse roles. However, as we have seen before, there are some cases in which the rigid word order is required depending on the forms of the NPs (in the case such as the accusative plural).
According to Karlsson, the distribution of the nominative and the partitive subjects is complementary (Karlsson 76). As stated
above, the partitive expresses the indefinite and non-limited quantity, and, because of this nature, the partitive subjects are usually placed at the end of the sentence (Karlsson 78).
kadu ñ lla on auto ñ j ñ a.
street-ade be-3s. car-plu-part ëThere are (some) cars in the street.í
purki ñ ssa on leipA ñ A.
tin-ine be-3s. bread-part ëThere are (some) bread in the tin.í
tAAllA on laps ñ i ñ a.
here(adv) be-3s. child-plu-part ëThere are (some) children here.í
ihmis -i -A kuole ñe pAivA.
People-plu-part die-3s.pres. everyday(adj) ë(Some) people die everyday.í
The partitive subject is also used when the existence of the entity referred by the subject is negated completely.
kadu ñlla ei ole auto ña.
street-ade 3s.neg. be-inf. car-part.sg. ëThere is no car in the street.í
However, when we are referring to the actual existence, the nominative subject is used.
auto ei ole kadu ñlla.
car.nom.sg. 3s.neg. be-inf. street-ade ëThe car is not in the street.í
Sulkala gives another example of the choice between the nominative and the partitive subjects in negation, in accordance with the definiteness of the entity (Sulkala 211-212).
metasA ñssA ei ole karhu ña.
forest-ine.sg. neg.3sg. be-inf bear-part ëThere is no bear in the forest (=none exists).í
metasA -ssA ei ole karhu.
forest-ine.sg. neg.3sg. be-inf bear.nom.sg. ëIt is not a bear that is in the forest (=but something else exists).í
Sometimes the genitive is also used as the subject, but its use is limited to the expressions such as necessity.
minu -n tAyt ñyy lAhteA.
1sg.-gen. must-3s. leave-inf. ëI must leave.í
he ñi ñdAn tAyt ñyy lAhteA.
3rd person-plu-gen must.3s. leave-inf ëThey must leave.í
In the traditional Finnish grammar, these genitive subjects were called ëdative adverbials,í and only the nominative and the partitive were considered to be the subjects in Finnish (Karlsson 90). These genitive subjects, in addition to the partitive subjects, seem to be the oblique subjects, by Andrewsís terminology because, according to Andrews, the oblique subjects,
In Finnish, these partitive and genitive subjects are placed at the subject position, either at the beginning or at the end of the sentence. In addition, as we have seen, the verbs do not agree with these subjects , and all verbs take the 3rd person singular forms regardless of the person and the number of the subject, expressed by these kinds of the subjects. We can, then, conclude that these partitive and genitive subjects are the oblique subjects in Finnish, rather than we consider, as the traditional Finnish grammar says, them to be the adverbials.
Looking at the nominative subjects, we can find that Finnish employs the ëtopic-subjectí system. In language which employ this topic-subject, such as English, the subjects are usually definite, and some ëpresentational pragmatic articulationsí are required to introduce the agent-type participants into the discourse (Shophen 119). In Finnish, the subject needs to be the nominative, which expresses the definite entity, if it is used as the subject of the transitive verb, which requires two arguments, an agent and a patient, most of the time.
However, if the agent-like subject is not presupposed, we need the presentational pragmatic articulation, and in Finnish, such non-presupposed subjects are put at the end of the sentence when being introduced into the discourse. The sentence, ëA woman got the car,í where the subject, not presupposed, is placed at the end of the sentence, gives us the example of how such presentational pragmatic articulation works in Finnish. Considering the placement of the unknown subjects, we can conclude that the subjects in Finnish are the topic-subject types rather than the ëagent-subjectí ones.
THE OBJECT IN FINNISH
In Finish, there is no cross-referencing on the verbs with the objects, regardless of which kind of object, direct, indirect, or secondary is. It is, then, safe to conclude in Finnish, that there is no secondary object, which is found in Kinyarwanda or Warlpiri. If there is no cross-referencing on the verbs with regard to the objects, then, another test used to identify the direct objecthood will be, according to Andrews, passivization (Shophen 126).
In Finnish, however, we do not have the passive construction similar to the one in English, and we need to try such passivization test as Andrews uses in Icelandic. According to Andrews, although the datives and the genitives, in the Icelandic example, at the subject position do not undergo the passivization, he mentions that they serve as the oblique subjects in the passive sentences. Then, he concludes that they, the dative and the genitive subjects in the passive sentences, are the objects in the active sentences based on the fact that they move onto the subject positions in the passive sentences (Shophen 122).
Taking the sentence that we have seen before as the example,
auto ñn hankk ñi nainen.
car-acc.sg. get-3s.imperfect. woman.nom.sg.
this sentence was translated before into the active sentence, ëA woman got the car.í In Finnish, however, sentences similar to this one is usually translated into a passive sentence, and if we take this sentence as an example, the translation will be, ëThe car was got by a woman. (Karlsson 63)í It seems that this is because,
Considering these facts, the Finnish accusative object, placed at the subject position or at the beginning of the sentence, serves as
the oblique subject, which can be found in Icelandic examples.
Another example is,
kirja ñn ost ñi mies
book-acc.sg. buy-3s.imperfect man.nom. ëThe book was bought by a man (Karlsson 63).í
Then, we apply this kind of passivizing test for the sentence,
ann ñan lahja ñn vaimo ñlle ñni.
give-1s.present present-ass.sg. wife-all-poss.1sg. ëI give a present to my wife. (Karlsson 109)í
The sentence structure with the ditransitive verbs, such as ëann-ë in Finnish, is, Subject + Verb + Things Given + Recipient. Recipient is expressed by the ëallativeí case, made by attaching the suffix, ë-lleí to the nouns. Because of the pro-drop, the subject is not expressed here, but the 1st .sg. ëminA.í Then, if we apply the passive test here, we get,
lahja ñn ann ñan vaimo ñlle ñni (minA).
and the translation will be, ëThe present is given to my wife (by me).í As we have seen before, the genitive and the accusative, in addition to the nominative, are allowed to be placed at the subject of definiteness position, that is, at the beginning of the sentence. However, no example allows the placement of the allative at the sentence-initial position, and
* vaimo ñlle ñni ann ñan lahja ñn (minA)
(my wife, all.) (I give) (present, acc.) (1s.nom.)
is not allowed by any examples. Then, the recipient of the sentence fails to be at the sentence-initial position, and it seems to be impossible to form the passive sentence, meaning, ëMy wife is given a present (by me)í.
According to Andrews, the direct object will always be the recipient-like NP, and he has got this conclusion by the passivization test (Shophen 122-123). In Finnish, however, the recipient-like NP fails the passivization test, and this result contradicts Andrewís hypothesis. As there is no cross referencing with the objects in Finnish, other tests for the direct objecthood, such as causativization and reflexivization, by Andrewís term (Shophen 126), should be employed in order to see if recipient-like NP can be the direct object in Finnish.
Keys
A: low, front vowel (ëbat,í as in English)
O: mid, front, rounded, vowel
nom: nominative
acc. : accusative
ine: inessive
ade: adessive
par: partitive
gen. "genitive
all: allative
Works Cited
Karlsson, Fred. Finnish Grammar. Werner Soderstorn Osakeyhtio, Helsinki, 1982.
Sulkala, Helena. Finnish, Discriptive Grammars. Routledge, London and New York, 1992.
Shophen, Timothy. Language Typology and Syntactic Description. (Volume I, 98-130) Cambridge University Press, London, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sydney, 1985.
Back to languages table of contents
Back to topics
Revised February 19, 1999