1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Finnish
  4. >
  5. "Otso kuulee, että puro on lä…

"Otso kuulee, että puro on lähellä."

Translation:Otso can hear that the stream is near.

July 7, 2020



Also: Otso hears that the sream is near should be correct answer. Otso can hear means literally: Otso voi kuulla että


Why "can hear" instead of "hears"?


Because in English you often say "can hear" without actually emphasising your ability to hear, while you might use "hear" when you're talking about hearing something from another person:

"I can hear a car outside." "I hear you bought a new car."

To be fair, with this particular sentence I think both "Otso hears" and "Otso can hear" are fine, because "Otso hears" would not automatically be interpreted as "Otso heard from someone."

(While adding "can" to many other verbs would absolutely be about your ability to do it, like "I can run" or "I can read", saying "I can hear" often just mean you're hearing a sound right now unless context indicates otherwise.)


Now it accepted "near", which is fine, but it should accept "close" and "nearby" as well, not least because they are more idiomatic. Please fix this.


I was marked wrong and I'm confused by the inconsistent translations. Sometimes they say "lähellä" means "nearby" and sometimes they say it means "near." Also, where does the "can" come in? I do not see "osata" in the answer.


"Lähellä" can be either (or close, close by or sometimes even "almost here" as in "Joulu on jo lähellä." "Christmas is almost here already."). Where you can't translate "nearby" to "lähellä" are expressions where it's used as an adjective, like "the nearby villages".

Here I would accept "near", "nearby", "close" and "close by" all.


Puro is Stream, The stream, and A stream. Or did I miss something?


Correct, and the selection of acceptable translations should reflect that.


This is probably my favorite skill so far. I just felt the need to say so.

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