1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Finnish
  4. >
  5. "Oravat juoksevat pois, koska…

"Oravat juoksevat pois, koska ne kuulevat, että minä olen lähellä."

Translation:The squirrels run away, because they can hear that I am near.

July 10, 2020



Should be accepted without "can" imo


BOTH of these should be accepted! FIX IT!

The squirrels run away because they hear that I am close by.

The squirrels run away because they hear that I am nearby.


There is no can verb in this sentence


Should be accepted without "that".

"The squirrels run away, because they can hear I am near." is perfectly good English.


Kuulla should never be translated as "can hear". Can hear in english is always a statement about possibility, not actuality. It sounds wrong, every time, just like oma and "of X's own" - that a weird way to say it that has specific nuances.


I think not. I can hear you is a statemwnt of actuallity


Miksi käännetään 'kuulevat' kuin 'can hear'? Siellä ei ole 'voivat'.

[deactivated user]

    It's just more natural. Languages don't translate word-for-word.


    Why is CAN here in the english? OSAA is not here ... it should be WITHOUT CAN


    Is the unusual comma usage in this course normal in Finnish? If it were breaking up an English sentence like that it would be grammatically incorrect. I've noticed this several times.


    I don't know what you mean by unusual comma usage, but in Finnish side clauses are separated with commas that come before the conjunction word. In this case we start with "Oravat juoksevat pois", then comes the side clauses that start with "koska" (because) and "että" (that) which are considered conjunction words.


    Ok, thank you! In English sometimes a comma would be used before "because", but definitely not before "that"

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