1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Finnish
  4. >
  5. "– Do you dance the tango oft…

"– Do you dance the tango often? – No. We have so little time these days."

Translation:– Tanssitteko te usein tangoa? – Emme. Meillä on nykyään niin vähän aikaa.

July 20, 2020



Does free word order apply here? "Meillä on niin vähän aikaa nykyään" works just as fine?


Yes. Also Nykyään meillä on niin vähän aikaa should work.


I can confirm that Duo accepts putting the "nykyään" at the end, as _Fyri suggested.


But it's still not accepted at the beginning.


I had "nykyään" at the end and it's unfortunately been marked incorrect. (Nov '21).


"Tanssitteko" without "te" was not accepted. Reported.

[deactivated user]

    I had this sentence as a fill in form for only the word "emme". The rest was already there. I filled in "ei" and it was accepted, with "emme" as alternate solution. Can someone explain what the Finnish rules are in this case? I would also like to know if kirjakieli and puhekieli agree on this point?


    "Ei" would just be "no" without any connection to personal pronouns or anything else (as opposite to "kyllä"/"joo"). I think it's an acceptable answer here, although you could of course continue it with "emme" (as in "ei, emme tanssi"). "Emme" is of course more like "we do not", which on its own suits the question as well. You can use all of these ("ei", "emme", "ei, emme (tanssi)") in both written and spoken Finnish.


    Is one considered more polite, common, or otherwise preferable?


    "Emme (tanssi)" and "Ei, emme (tanssi)" are certainly less blunt and so feel more polite. Those are the ones I'd use anyway.


    I disagree! "Ei" for an answer to this question is wrong, and it should be only "emme" or "ei, emme." I think your "Ei" comes from the colloquial, spoken way of saying "Ei tanssita" instead of "Emme tanssi." I'm sure you wouldn't answer "Ei" if someone asked you "Syötkö rottia?" At least I wouldn't.


    I see the discussion about singular/plural below, but I think this mixture should be accepted: "tansitko usein tangoa? en. meillä nykyään niin vähän aikaa"

    As the question could be adressed to one person, replying with the explanation that a plural (e.g. a couple) has little time nowadays.


    There are couple of typos in your example, otherwise it should be fine. One "s" is missing from the "tansitko", and "on" word is missing.

    So, correct mixture would be: "Tanssitko usein tangoa? En. Meillä on nykyään niin vähän aikaa."


    Ah, right. Thanks! I see them now as well.


    Can pieni be used instead of vähän here as well?


    As I understand it, no. That would be like saying "small time" in English. I have found it used, translated as "a small window of time" though.


    Nope, it can't be used here. The sentence would indeed sound like saying "We have so small time these days", As @AGreatUserName said.


    I wrote it like that too by accident, but then got to thinking, maybe it could be used as well:D


    What I don't get is,why usein comes before tangoa in the word order? Is there a rule I need to know?


    Yep, the "usein" needs to be before the "tangoa". Finns understand the reverse order just fine, but it would highlight, that the speaker is not native.


    "nykyisin" was not accepted, reported.


    So vähän means a little and niin vähän means so little. But how to say little?


    If vähän means both little and a little, then Puhun vähän suomea can be interpreted either as I speak little Finnish or I speak a little Finnish?


    It is ambiguous, the actual meaning depending on context. That is why you often say "vain vähän" if you mean "only a little / just a little" and "kyllä minä vähän" if you mean "some".


    The difference in English is that "a little" is a small but significant amount, a positive connotation, whereas "little" is an insignificant amount, a negative connotation. For the later in Finnish you can say vain vähän to make it clear.


    They both do mean "a small amount of Finnish", don't they? Why should your opinion of whether the small amount is significant or insignificant always be made clear? I was also confused when I first realized that the English "I'll read a book" can mean either "Luen kirjan" or "Luen kirjaa" and I have no way to know which one it is and it's inconvenient to clarify which one I mean.


    Indeed. In English it is also for me sometimes inconvenient to clarify what I mean when I say I'll read a book. The difference between Luen kirjan and Luen kirjaa is actually quite easy to understand for speakers of Slavic languages. We distinguish between perfective and imperfective verbs and it roughly corresponds to the difference between accusative and partitive in Finnish. However, we express it by using different verbs and in Finnish it is the object that changes. You are probably familiar with that concept since you are learning Russian.


    @LesSaid1 Yes, Luen kirjan means I will read the book in the sense that I will read it completely. Luen kirjaa means that I will be in process of reading the book, it's irrelevant whether I finish it or not. It is like I will read (some of) the book.

    [deactivated user]

      What is the difference? Is it that in English it is not clear whether it will be all of the book or just a part of it?


      Yes, I know some of it. Right now, I feel like there's an endless amount of verbs that can be created from the familiar verbs with prefixes to say slightly different things without much logic, but maybe I'll find some. Didn't expect you to be a speaker of a Slavic language.


      I wrote tanssitko sinä, why is this not accepted. Does it have to be in plural?


      The answer says “WE have so little time these days”, so clearly the question was addressed to at least 2 people, hence, yes, here it has to be plural- tanssitteko te.


      As the answer in the second part is 'we have so little time these days', it implies that you are asking multiple people. Otherwise it would be 'I have so little time...'


      Tanssitko sinä usein tangoa? – Emme. Meillä on nykyään niin vähän aikaa. Is this also correct? Please guide me.


      There is one typo in your example, otherwise it should be fine. "Emme" should be "En".

      So, correct mixture would be: "Tanssitko (sinä) usein tangoa? En. Meillä on nykyään niin vähän aikaa."

      The "sinä" is optional.


      It is not correct in this case because the answer clearly indicates that the question was in plural- WE have so little time... Tanssitko sinä (singular) could be correct in another context, but then the answer would also need to be “en”, not “emme”. Here the only correct option is “tanssitteko te”- ”emme”


      I wrote tanssitteko te usein tangoa? me emme. meillä on nykyään niin vähän aikaa. It was marked wrong. The only difference I see from the expected solution (except upper case) is my me emme instead of emme. What do I miss here?


      There was no Ei option, but it was suggesting that it should be Ei like this as a correct form "–Tanssitteko te usein tangoa? –Ei. Meillä on nykyään niin vähän aikaa." Reported.


      I don't think ei is the correct form in this case. The question was in the 2nd person plural. This can be either the polite form for 1 person (which is usually only used in really formal situations), or to more persons. So if you answer you would say "En" as the denying answer or if you anwer as we, you would say "Emme"


      I think "ei" can simply mean "no" so it would be another way of answering in the negative. "Emme" is something like "we-not" ... at least that's how I tranalate in my head to be aware of the structure.


      Ei is indeed the default, but it is the 3rd person singular form, meaning "it no", "she not", "he not" etc. It is not completely neutral of person.


      Far too difficult at this stage for begginers.


      Should all adverbs come before the verb it applies to?


      I wrote, "Tansiitko usein tangoa? En. Meillä on niin vähän aikää nykyään." I think it should be accepted, because it's perfectly possible that I am having a conversation with just one person (sinä) and the person responds but includes their spouse in the thought that they have so little time.

      Or did I make a mistake elsewhere? Oh, darn it, now I see one - I missed an "s" in "tanssiitko." I wish Duo was a little bit more liberal with those double consonants. Some I can hear. But s and ss sound the same to me.


      You also inserted a double vowel that isn't supposed to be there :) Making the distinction between short and long sounds seems to be a common problem even among quite fluent learners, and yet it can be pretty crucial at times due to the significant number of minimal pairs where the difference lies in the length of one sound. The length of a /s/ sound can be the difference between a cat and a race, for instance.

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