Questions & Answers about Ne varoitti mua vuodosta.
Why is the word for leak in the elative case (vuodosta)?
The verb varoittaa (to warn) has a specific rection: the thing you are warning someone about must be expressed in the elative case (-sta or -stä). Therefore, "about the leak" becomes vuodosta.
Why is the pronoun for "me" in the partitive form mua rather than an accusative form?
The verb varoittaa dictates the case for both the topic and the person. The person receiving the warning must always be in the partitive case. Mua is the common spoken form of minua, which is the partitive of minä.
Since ne means "they", why is the verb varoitti in the singular rather than the plural varoittivat?
In spoken Finnish, the third-person plural pronoun ne is paired with the third-person singular form of the verb. If this were formal written Finnish, it would be He varoittivat, using both the formal plural pronoun and the plural verb ending.
What is the base form of vuodosta and why does the consonant change?
The base noun is vuoto (a leak), which is derived from the verb vuotaa (to leak). When adding the closed syllable ending -sta, consonant gradation occurs and the strong t weakens to a d, making the stem vuodo-.