1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Finnish
  4. >
  5. "Otso and Pyry are now marrie…

"Otso and Pyry are now married."

Translation:Otso ja Pyry ovat nyt naimisissa.

June 27, 2020



'nyt ovat' would be wrong?


yeah, that word order sounds unnatural. I would use the word order that's in the translation or say that "Otso ja Pyry ovat naimisissa nyt"


Or Nyt Otso ja Pyry ovat naimisissa.


Too many possible word orders to remember! And actually now that I think I about it "Nyt ovat Otso ja Pyry naimisissa" is a correct sentence, it just puts a lot of emphasis on the word "nyt" and sounds a bit oldish (?? is this a word). Like I could imagine someone saying at the wedding "No nyt on Otso ja Pyry naimisissa"


The earlier it appears, the more important it is. The "standard" order in this type of sentence is:

Subject + verb + time/frequency adverb + manner adverb + particle + place

An example:

He lähtevät usein nopeasti takaisin kotiin. They often leave quickly to go back home.


  • lähteä to leave
  • takaisin back
  • kotiin (to) home

There are a couple of adverbs that are a bit "special", like todella, which prefers to appear before the verb.

He todella ovat naimisissa. They really are married.


I got credit for: Otso ja Pyry on nyt naimisissa.

is that ok?


Yes, although you should not use it in writing, only in speech. It's very common in spoken language to use the 3rd person singular verb forms for the 3rd person plural too. In fact, it's so common that it's one of the few spoken language features that's used in the entire country. We strive to have it accepted as an alternative translation in the course, although the option is still not possible in most sentences. We'll be adding them slowly. :)


thx for the response


I believe both "Otso ja Pyry ovat nyt naimisissa." and "Otso ja Miikka ovat naimisissa nyt." are correct depending on the stress one makes in their speech.


Yes, you can place "nyt" in different parts of the sentence, but the tone and emphasis also change accordingly, as you said.

"Nyt Otso ja Pyry ovat naimisissa" is also possible, emphasis on "nyt".

"Otso ja Pyry nyt ovat naimisissa" is a well-formed sentence as well, but it feels like there has been some sort of an argument, and finally one of the people arguing got bored with all the nonsense and exclaimed "Otso ja Pyry nyt ovat naimisissa! Piste!" to end the discussion. It's like, there's no point arguing, things are as they are. "Piste" there means "dot, period, point, full stop".


I would translate Otso ja Pyry nyt ovat naimisissa as "Otso and Pyry happen to be married", so it's good to keep in mind that often changing the word order results in a very different translation. The option with nyt and naimisissa in a different order is accepted though. The tone is different, yes, but it's harder to see that in the English translation, so we accept both. :)


It doesn't say - is Pyry a male or female name? I don't mind either way, but I know about the Finnish law about gendered names, and all other names so far have been marked male or female (there was one that was unisex but I don't remember it; it meant something like lake or cloud).


Otso ("bear") is for men only and most Pyry's ("blizzard") are men too, but there are a couple of women in Finland with that name too. The three very distinctly unisex names mentioned in the course are Lumi ("snow"), Kaino ("coy"), and Vieno ("mild"). The idea of Finnish names being for one gender only is actually relatively recent, less than a thousand years old. Original Finnic names were for the most part unisex. Kaino and Vieno are one of the few names to have survived the change. Lumi, on the other hand, is a name that has been revived during the past few decades. Most Finnish names are descriptive and/or nature related, but this is a particularly common feature of unisex names. Examples of other unisex names include Syksy ("autumn"), Myrsky ("storm"), Pouta ("cloudless"), and Sumu ("fog"). :)


Wow, thanks for the elaborate response! I knew already that Otso means bear. Yeah, Lumi is the one I meant!

It's quite interesting though, for a language that doesn't distinguish whether hän is a woman or a man, that it requires distinctly female or male names. I wonder if the non-distinguishing is a reason for the law/idea (so that you can tell if hän is a woman or a man), or if it's just a coincidence.

Learn Finnish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.