Näin onnettomuuden omin silmin, mutta en uskonut sitä.

Questions & Answers about Näin onnettomuuden omin silmin, mutta en uskonut sitä.

What case is used in omin silmin to mean 'with my own eyes'?
This is the instructive case, which is exactly what this lesson is teaching! It is formed by adding -in to the plural stem of a word, and it describes how or with what means an action is done. Just like in English, the adjective oma (own) must agree with the noun silmä (eye), so both take the plural -in ending, becoming omin silmin.
Why does onnettomuus (accident) become onnettomuuden here?
It is in the accusative case (which looks like the genitive -n in the singular) because it is the total object of the verb näin (I saw). You use this case when an action is completed or viewed as a whole. Since onnettomuus ends in -uus, its stem changes to onnettomuude- before you add the -n.
Why is 'it' translated as sitä (partitive) rather than sen (accusative) in the second half of the sentence?
There are two overlapping rules at work here. First, the verb uskoa (to believe) naturally takes a partitive object when you are believing a thing. Second, the phrase is negative (en uskonut). In Finnish, if the verb is negative, the object almost always has to be in the partitive case.
How is the negative past tense formed in en uskonut?
To say you didn't do something in the past, you combine the conjugated negative verb (here, en for 'I don't') with the past participle of the main verb. For singular subjects, the past participle ends in -nut or -nyt. So en uskonut literally pieces together as 'I don't' + 'believed'.

Learn Näin onnettomuuden omin silmin, mutta en uskonut sitä and more in Finnish

All course content and exercises are completely free — no paywalls, no trial periods, no signup needed.

  • Practice with interactive exercises
  • Track your progress with spaced repetition
  • Learn at your own pace — completely free