"I am washing the floor and father is washing the dog."
Translation:Minä pesen lattiaa ja isä pesee koiraa.
It can be left out, though with this particular sentence I'd rather keep it, since it notes and highlights the difference between the two parts of the sentence (me vs. father). It sounds more natural to keep the different parts of the sentence grammatically similar in this case.
Two things there. Wrong choice of verb: "minä pesen" = "I am washing"; it's an act that probably involves water and soap or something like that. You could wash/pestä clothes or dogs. "Minä siivoan" = "I am cleaning"; maybe with a broom swish away the largest dust bunnies, or pick up stuff from the floor. The other thing is the form of "lattia", which should be "lattiaa" in this case. This is the partitive form, see for example on Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partitive_case
By the way, dust bunny is "villakoira" in Finnish, which also means poodle!
I think the reasons that omitting “minä” is unaccepted are either (or both):
- course developers aren’t changing this.
- “Minä” is actually there as emphasis. I think that, although it is correct to omit the pronouns in first-person and second-person conjugations, here, there is a distinction to be made between “father” and “I”.
If you are so annoyed by this that you bother making a comment, why don't you ready the previous comments instead? The one that makes sense is from Riimususi. That "minä" is appropriate in this sentence "to highlight the difference between the two parts of the sentence (me vs. father)".
I don't get that anyone is suggesting that "minä" is inappropriate or wrong in this sentence. My understanding is that it is never wrong to include the pronoun, especially if something is being emphasized by it.
What I am getting is that it should ALSO be correct to omit the pronoun, that there is nothing in this sentence to make it strictly necessary. I know of no reason why leaving it out in this case should be considered wrong, but it is marked wrong by this course. If there is such a reason, I'd like to know what it is; if there is not such a reason, marking it wrong is an error and should be corrected.
There is the "father" in the second part of the sentence that needs balance. It probably makes the sentence a bit weird if the pronoun (minä) is omitted.
All we need is a moderator (who actually has Finnish as mother tongue) to explain, and erase the hundreds identical complaints on this comments page, since all the complaints from people who don't know Finnish (just trying to learn – that includes me) makes the probable answers hard to find.
I made the same mistake, but by leaning from the (very few) answers on this page I will accept this, and try to remember it.
I sent the question to a friend who is married to a Finnish woman. She answered now, that "minä" is needed in this sentence. The sentence does not sound right to her when "minä" is left out.
She said it becomes unclear without "minä", when there are two persons in a sentence like this one. And that it "feels odd or wrong without it". And she is a native Finnish speaker.