Breakdown of Riippuuko oleskelulupa siitä, että olemme naimisissa?
olla
to be
se
it / he / she (of a person) / that
että
that (conjunction)
naimisissa
married
Questions & Answers about Riippuuko oleskelulupa siitä, että olemme naimisissa?
Why do we say siitä, että instead of just että?
The verb riippua (to depend) requires its target to be in the elative case, ending in -sta/-stä. Because you cannot attach a case ending to an entire että clause, Finnish uses the pronoun se as a bridge. We put se into the elative case (siitä) to satisfy the verb's rection (case rule), and then introduce the clause.
Is riippua always used with the elative case?
Yes, when it means to depend on something, it always takes the elative case (-sta/-stä). If you are talking about something literally hanging, like a picture on a wall, it would take a location case like the inessive or adessive. But for abstract dependency, it must be elative.
Why does the sentence start with Riippuuko instead of the subject oleskelulupa?
To form a yes/no question, Finnish attaches the -ko/-kö question clitic to the word being questioned and moves it to the front. Since the main question is whether the permit depends on this condition, the verb riippuu gets the clitic and moves to the first position.
Why is the word for married written as naimisissa here?