Breakdown of Tämä ei ole fakta, vaan vaarallinen harhakäsitys.
tämä
this
olla
to be
ei
no / not (en, et, ei, emme, ette, eivät)
vaarallinen
dangerous
vaan
but rather (after a negative)
fakta
fact
harhakäsitys
misconception
Questions & Answers about Tämä ei ole fakta, vaan vaarallinen harhakäsitys.
Why do we use vaan instead of mutta for 'but' in this sentence?
Both words translate to 'but', but vaan is specifically used after a negative statement (like ei ole) when you want to completely correct or replace what was just denied. It translates best to 'but rather' or 'instead'. If you used mutta, it would sound like you are adding a separate contrasting thought rather than correcting the first one.
Why are the nouns fakta and harhakäsitys in the nominative case rather than the partitive, since the sentence is negative?
In negative sentences with the verb olla (to be), the complement word (the thing something 'is not') stays in the nominative case if it is a single, countable thing. You only use the partitive after a negative olla if the word is an uncountable mass noun (like water or coffee) or a plural word.
How does the compound word harhakäsitys break down?
It is made of harha (illusion, delusion, or wandering) and käsitys (understanding, idea, or conception). Put together, it creates the word for 'misconception' or 'false belief'.
Is the comma before vaan mandatory here?
Yes. In Finnish punctuation, you must almost always place a comma before conjunctions that express contrast, such as mutta (but) and vaan (but rather), even if the second part is just a phrase and not a full sentence with its own verb.
Learn Tämä ei ole fakta, vaan vaarallinen harhakäsitys 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