1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Finnish
  4. >
  5. "Emme asu Pariisissa vaan Pra…

"Emme asu Pariisissa vaan Prahassa."

Translation:We do not live in Paris but in Prague.

June 28, 2020



"We do not live in Paris but Prague." Is also a natural way to phrase this in English, it's common to leave out a repeat preposition.


I agree the second "in" is understood in English.


I'd agree it's common, but I'd argue it's definitely not correct! "I live not in Paris but in Prague" would be the technically correct form, but it admittedly sounds a bit old-fashioned. "I don't live in Paris but in Prague" is a bit more clunky but still works. Dropping the second "in" would make it incorrect, although I guess most people would still understand what was meant.


Why do you have to use " vaan" in this particular case, in stead of "mutta"? Because the English translation in DL of both words is "but"... Does anyone know this?


You just have to use "vaan" when the first part is negative.

  • X, mutta Y (X but Y)
  • X, mutta ei Y (X but not Y) - can also be shortened to "muttei"
  • ei X vaan Y (not X but Y)


I was thinking about this too. I had to think of two similar sentences in German and then the difference between the two words became apperant. So for all the Germans/people who know german: mutta = aber vaan = sondern (Denke ich mal


I think that "mutta" must always be located between clauses, but this "Prahassa" is less than a clause, so we use "vaan." At least you'd have to have a conjugated verb on both sides.


Rakastan tätä lausetta.


Is vaan the equivalent of "sondern" in German, that is "but" in a negative sentence?


Yes. See my comment above.


And this makes me wish for a "rather" in the translation - "but rather in prague". That fits sondern sense well.

Anyone else wishing for a 'rather' here?

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