Illatiivi

[Woods]

I saw at more than one place (Kielitoimiston sanakirja*, some conjugation tables in Wiktionary) that for many nominal forms, only four forms are given: nominative, partitive and genitive singular and plural, but also illative singular and plural. Is there anything particular about the illative that makes it deserving of being mentioned in every single entry in the dictionary? Like I would expect that learning the nominative, partitive and genitive forms would be enough, and then one can take out a letter from one of the endings, double the last vowel, add an -n and voilà. But are there some irregularities that make it that it's not that simple?

Another thing that seems confusing is when we use -seen/-siin and when we just double the last consonant and add an -n, or an h and then the plural consonant and then an -n. I have yet to observe the patterns; Fred Karlsson has some rules (which I was planning to mention, but they are as always messed-up and don't add up, so I guess I'm better off practising some conjugation and then making my own rules, or just learning it from somewhere else).

My main question though is whether I need to learn the illative form of each noun, or I can make them from knowing the nominative, partitive and genitive?


*And here I have one more question about titles: when those are mentioned, are their words capitalised (like in English they usually capitalise everything besides some articles and conjunctions, or sometimes everything), or do Finns capitalise only the first letter (like in French and Bulgarian for example)?

[Liisi]

*And here I have one more question about titles: when those are mentioned, are their words capitalised (like in English they usually capitalise everything besides some articles and conjunctions, or sometimes everything), or do Finns capitalise only the first letter (like in French and Bulgarian for example)?

We only capitalise the first letter in titles in Finnish.

Your main question is too difficult for me to answer, I hope someone else can still help.

[Virankannos]

My main question though is whether I need to learn the illative form of each noun, or I can make them from knowing the nominative, partitive and genitive?

Yes, illative singular of any given word depends on its stem type, which can be determined by nominative and genitive forms. Additionally, if the word has consonant gradation, illative forms should be in the strong grade*. However, the rules are rather complicated and require some knowledge of the history and development of Finnish morphology, as illustrated below.

Illative singular:
Suffix -hVn is used

• after monosyllabic stems: maa-han 'earth, ground'
• after a stem that ends in a diphthong: maanantai-hin 'Monday'

Suffix -Vn is used

• after a short vowel in an unstressed syllable: sukka-an 'sock', pimeä-än 'dark', kirjasto-on 'library'

Suffix -seen is used

• after a stem that ends in a long vowel in a unstressed syllable: kaunii-seen 'beautiful', rikkaa-seen 'rich', konee-seen 'machine'
• in loanwords whose stem ends in a long vowel in a unstressed syllable. In this case, the suffix variant -hVn is also possible: essee-seen ~ essee-hen 'essay'

Illative plural:
As a general rule, the corresponding illative plural suffix is used as in the singular**:

• -hVn → -hin
• -Vn → -in
• -seen → -siin

* Illative plural forms of some polysyllabic words can be either strong or weak: ammatti 'profession' → ammattei-hin ~ ammatei-hin

** If the stem of a word that in singular gets -Vn ends in a diphthong in the plural, the illative plural suffix is -hin instead, because otherwise this would create a triphthong which are not valid in Finnish, e.g. (sg.) kirjasto-on : (pl.) kirjasto-i-hin (not kirjasto-i-in). Also, in plural stems that end in a (historically) contracted diphthong or long /ii/, both -hin and -siin are possible: kone-i-hin ~ kone-i-siin 'machine (pl.)', kauni-i-hin ~ kauni-i-siin 'beautiful (pl.)'

[Woods]

My main question though is whether I need to learn the illative form of each noun, or I can make them from knowing the nominative, partitive and genitive?

Yes, illative singular of any given word depends on its stem type, which can be determined by nominative and genitive forms. Additionally, if the word has consonant gradation, illative forms should be in the strong grade*. However, the rules are rather complicated and require some knowledge of the history and development of Finnish morphology, as illustrated below.

Illative singular:
Suffix -hVn is used

• after monosyllabic stems: maa-han 'earth, ground'
• after a stem that ends in a diphthong: maanantai-hin 'Monday'

Suffix -Vn is used

• after a short vowel in an unstressed syllable: sukka-an 'sock', pimeä-än 'dark', kirjasto-on 'library'

Suffix -seen is used

• after a stem that ends in a long vowel in a unstressed syllable: kaunii-seen 'beautiful', rikkaa-seen 'rich', konee-seen 'machine'

(...)

Illative plural:
As a general rule, the corresponding illative plural suffix is used as in the singular**:

• -hVn → -hin
• -Vn → -in
• -seen → -siin

(...)

** If the stem of a word that in singular gets -Vn ends in a diphthong in the plural, the illative plural suffix is -hin instead, because otherwise this would create a triphthong which are not valid in Finnish, e.g. (sg.) kirjasto-on : (pl.) kirjasto-i-hin (not kirjasto-i-in).

Thanks for the explanations, Virankannos - I will keep those in mind while studying the illative.

But in short, if I learn the general declension types (taivutustyypit), I will be able to make the illative for any nominal (noun, pronoun, adjective or numeral), won't I?

Or there could still be something that cannot be guessed, like consonant gradation? Maybe they include the illative cause it contains the strong stem, while the genitive contains the weak one, the nominative is the basic form and for the partitive it depends?

But still I find it confusing to study the illatives together with the genitive cause they could act similarly. So I would rather learn the rules of declension and origin if those are enough?

* Illative plural forms of some polysyllabic words can be either strong or weak: ammatti 'profession' → ammattei-hin ~ ammatei-hin

What do you mean with the ~ sign - that those forms mean roughly but not exactly the same? Kielitoimiston sanakirja lists only ammatteihin with double t.

Suffix -seen is used

(...)

• in loanwords whose stem ends in a long vowel in a unstressed syllable. In this case, the suffix variant -hVn is also possible: essee-seen ~ essee-hen 'essay'

What makes it that loanwords get extra treatment?

Also, in plural stems that end in a (historically) contracted diphthong or long /ii/, both -hin and -siin are possible: kone-i-hin ~ kone-i-siin 'machine (pl.)', kauni-i-hin ~ kauni-i-siin 'beautiful (pl.)'

I just googled both in quote marks and got roughly 400 000 results for kauniisiin and 500 for kauniihin. Many of the latter are indeed from grammar explanations where they keep telling that those forms are possible.

I've noticed the same with other options that barely anyone ever uses. Why do they insist so much on them instead of removing them from dictionaries and leaving them in history and in the few books where they (possibly) were used once or twice?

What is a historically contacted diphthong and how to recognise it?

[Virankannos]

But in short, if I learn the general declension types (taivutustyypit), I will be able to make the illative for any nominal (noun, pronoun, adjective or numeral), won't I?

Well, considering the illative form is dependent on the declension type, I would say yes. Although, I have never actually taught this topic in Finnish as a second/foreign language class. The system I presented is actually meant as study material for a Finnish morphology class for native Finnish speakers. It may well be that L2 teachers use another, more simplified system for non-natives that also works fine.

Or there could still be something that cannot be guessed, like consonant gradation? Maybe they include the illative cause it contains the strong stem, while the genitive contains the weak one, the nominative is the basic form and for the partitive it depends?

This sounds plausible too.

What do you mean with the ~ sign - that those forms mean roughly but not exactly the same? Kielitoimiston sanakirja lists only ammatteihin with double t.

The tilde ~ means that the forms are equal variants of the same form, so you can use both. So different from the tilde as it is used in mathematics or logic.

Now that I think about it, ammatti was not the best example here: ammateihin (weak grade) is indeed rare. But for example both laatikoihin and laatikkoihin seem quite normal to me.

What makes it that loanwords get extra treatment?

I guess because some loanwords haven't adapted fully to the Finnish morphological system, so a speaker is not always sure which native stem type it should equate to, which causes variation. A good example (although not for illative forms) is the word analyysi, which can take either back vowel or front vowel suffixes: analyysi-ssa ~ analyysi-ssä. Native Finnish words don't have front and back vowels mixed in a single stem, so that causes confusion and subsequently variation.

I just googled both in quote marks and got roughly 400 000 results for kauniisiin and 500 for kauniihin. Many of the latter are indeed from grammar explanations where they keep telling that those forms are possible.

I've noticed the same with other options that barely anyone ever uses. Why do they insist so much on them instead of removing them from dictionaries and leaving them in history and in the few books where they (possibly) were used once or twice?

You're right: kauniihin is much less common than kauniisiin. As for the question, I can't say for sure. I guess it's still used somewhat so it's kept in the standard. This reminds me: I once read in an older Finnish grammar (like around 100 years old) which stated that words like matala 'low' can be declined as either matalissa or mataloissa. Today, the latter type is gone altogether: it's not mentioned in grammars or dictionaries, I've never heard it used.

Language changes but there's always some delay in when the changes are reflected in descriptions. You probably won't see kauniihin in a Finnish grammar written in the 22nd century.

What is a historically contacted diphthong and how to recognise it?

You can find them in plural stems of certain types of words:

• Words that end in -Vs in nom.sg. (+ weak grade) and have -VV- stem in gen.sg. (+ strong grade): rikas : rikkaa-, kaunis : kaunii-, kirves : kirvee-, seiväs : seipää- > (pl.) rikkai-, kaunii-, kirvei-, seipäi-
• Words that end in -e in nom.sg. and have -ee- stem in gen.sg.: sade : satee-, laite : laittee- > (pl.) satei-, laittei-
• Words that end in -VV in nom.sg. and have a similar stem in gen.sg.: vapaa, harmaa, talkoo, hakkuu > (pl.) vapai-, harmai-, talkoi-, hakkui-

Btw, "historically contracted" simply means that there used to be a consonant between the last two vowels in the stem but it has disappeared and left behind a long vowel (in sg.) or a diphthong (in pl.):

• kaunis : kaunii- < kaunihi- < *kaunize- (a loan from Proto-Germanic *skauniz)
• sade : satee- < *saδek : *sateγe- (or *sadek : *satege-)
• harmaa < *harmaγa (or *harmaga) (a loan from a Baltic source; cf. Lithuanian šarma(s))