1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Finnish
  4. >
  5. "Siilit puraisevat tuhmaa koi…

"Siilit puraisevat tuhmaa koiraa."

Translation:The hedgehogs bite the naughty dog.

June 29, 2020



Google translate tells me that I can use "bad" as a translation for "tuhma" - and in English it would make sense. They would rather say "bad dog" than naughty dog...


Bad added as a possibility.

There are a lot of tuhmia animals in this course, we'll have to see if bad can be added for all of them or not...


Why " the naughty dog", why not " a naughty dog" ? In Finnish there is no difference


Yup, a should be accepted here. Report it, so the contributor team can consider it.

(It's not really true that there is no difference in Finnish: often the context does require one or the other. But here, as there is no context, either is indeed correct.)


Why "bite" when everywhere else it is the -ing form. So why not: "are biting"


Puraista [puraisevat] is a verb meaning a quick, one time bite. Biting points to repetitive and/or continuous/ long lasting action, which would be translated as purra [purevat].

We don't have such distinctive (one time/ continuous) words for every action and that's why most Finnish verbs can be translated to English either way.


I'm really grateful to people like you who leave these helpful comments. I can't wait for duo to make lesson tips about this, it's one of the more difficult things to grasp for foreign speakers imo and consistently translate correctly (especially for those of us who aren't native English speakers either and may not have an intuitive understanding of verb tenses)


I'm afraid the way Duolingo has designed it, some of the learning occurs right here, in the sentence discussions... In the beginning, they didn't even have any Tips&Notes!

It's always worth checking these discussions, doing a Google search, asking a question in the general Finnish discussions, and/or consult reputable websites like uusikielemme.fi and wiktionary.


Does this mean that the action is already in the past? How can one quick bite be in the present moment? Or is it like we see a frozen picture of hedgehogs biting a naughty dog and describe it as "they BITE the dog?" How is it used in Finnish?


This action is indeed in the present moment. It could be a picture, or you could be describing it as it takes place.

The hedgehogs bit the naughty dog would be Siilit puraisivat tuhmaa koiraa."


Would "to nip" be a good translation for puraista? A quick, one-time bite? Or is that too deliberately small / inconsequential? One can hardly say a shark nips, so if a shark would puraisee, nip probably wouldn't be appropriate.


Yep, you're right about it being "too light". To nip would be closer to (näykkäistä)[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/n%C3%A4ykk%C3%A4ist%C3%A4].


Thanks, that was my question too.


re Hacu's comment... The fact that there is more than one hedgehog means that there is more than one bite. I think 'are biting' is a more accurate translation


It's not about the exact number of bites, it's about how continuous the action is. Is biting is not a correct translation of puraisevat.


And that's because the ending -aista is used for "once" actions; to be biting would more likely be "purra," so "purevat" rather than "puraisevat."

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