Breakdown of Etsimme hotellia, mutta meillä ei ole karttaa.
olla
to be
mutta
but
me
we
ei
no / not (negative verb)
Questions & Answers about Etsimme hotellia, mutta meillä ei ole karttaa.
Why is the word for map, karttaa, in the partitive case here?
In Finnish, when you say you don't have something, the thing you don't have must always be in the partitive case. The base word is kartta, and adding the final -a makes it partitive to match the negative ei ole (don't have) structure.
Since "we" is plural, why do we use ei ole instead of the "we" form emme ole?
In Finnish, you don't literally say "we have". Instead, you say "on us is" (meillä on). When making this negative, the literal translation is "on us is not" (meillä ei ole). The verb is talking about the existence of the item, so it always stays in the 3rd person singular form (ei ole), no matter who is lacking the item!
Why is hotellia also in the partitive case? Is it because of the negative in the second half of the sentence?
No, the two halves of the sentence work independently. Hotellia is in the partitive case because of the verb etsiä (to look for). Verbs that describe an ongoing action or a process with no clear endpoint naturally force their object into the partitive case.
Why is there no word for "we" before etsimme in the first part of the sentence?
The ending of the verb, -mme, already means "we". In Finnish, you can often drop the pronouns for "I" and "we" when they act as the subject. Notice that you cannot drop it in the second half (meillä) because it carries the special -llä ending needed to express who possesses (or doesn't possess) the map.