Breakdown of Me emme ole nähneet lumivyöryä vuosiin.
olla
to be
me
we
ei
no / not (en, et, ei, emme, ette, eivät)
vuosi
year
nähdä
to see
lumivyöry
the avalanche
Questions & Answers about Me emme ole nähneet lumivyöryä vuosiin.
Why does "for years" translate to the illative plural form vuosiin?
In Finnish, when expressing how long something has not happened (like "in years" or "for years"), you use the illative case. Because we are talking about multiple years, it takes the illative plural vuosiin. If it were a negative action for just one year ("in a year"), it would be the illative singular vuoteen.
Why is the main verb nähneet and not nähnyt?
This sentence is in the negative present perfect tense ("have not seen"). To form this, you use the negative verb (emme) + ole + the active past participle. Because the subject me (we) is plural, the participle must agree in number and take the plural ending -t, becoming nähneet instead of the singular nähnyt.
Why is the object lumivyöryä in the partitive case?
The object of a negative sentence in Finnish is strictly in the partitive case. Because the action of seeing the avalanche did not happen (emme ole nähneet), the basic word lumivyöry must take the partitive ending -ä.
How would you rewrite this to say "We might see an avalanche" using the current lesson's verb saattaa?
You would conjugate the modal verb for "we" (saatamme) and follow it with the 1st infinitive of the main verb (nähdä), resulting in: Me saatamme nähdä lumivyöryn. Notice that because the sentence becomes positive, the object changes from the partitive lumivyöryä to the genitive-accusative lumivyöryn.
Learn Me emme ole nähneet lumivyöryä vuosiin 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