Eilen en syönyt ravintolassa, koska tein ruokaa kotona.

at home

Breakdown of Eilen en syönyt ravintolassa, koska tein ruokaa kotona.

• ruoka: the food
• syödä: to eat
• -ssa: in
• koska: because
• eilen: yesterday
• ravintola: the restaurant
• en: not
• tehdä: to make

Questions & Answers about Eilen en syönyt ravintolassa, koska tein ruokaa kotona.

Why is the main verb in the negative clause "syönyt" in its past participle form rather than a regular past tense form?

In Finnish, negative sentences do not use the regular past tense form. Instead, the negative auxiliary verb (here, en for "I") is combined with the past participle of the main verb. In an affirmative sentence you’d say söin (“I ate”), but in the negative it becomes en syönyt (“I did not eat”).

What does the adverb Eilen mean and what is its role in the sentence?

Eilen means “yesterday.” It provides a time reference, setting the scene for when the action did or did not take place. In this sentence, it tells us that the events described happened yesterday.

What case is the word ravintolassa in, and why is that case used?

Ravintolassa is in the inessive case, which is marked by the suffix -ssa. This case indicates location, so the word means “in/at the restaurant.” Finnish uses such cases to show spatial relationships without needing prepositions.

How does the conjunction koska function in this sentence?

Koska is a subordinating conjunction meaning “because.” It introduces the subordinate clause "tein ruokaa kotona," explaining the reason why the speaker did not eat at the restaurant.

Why is ruokaa in the partitive form, and what does that indicate?

Ruokaa is in the partitive case. In Finnish, the partitive is often used with objects that are indefinite, uncountable, or refer to a portion rather than a whole. Here it implies that the speaker made some food (an unspecified quantity) rather than a complete, clearly defined meal.

Why is the subject pronoun (minä) omitted from the sentence?

Finnish is a pro-drop language, which means that subject pronouns are often omitted because the verb forms already clearly indicate the subject. In this sentence, the negative auxiliary en shows that the subject is first person singular (“I”), so adding minä is unnecessary.

What would the affirmative version of this sentence look like?

In the affirmative, the sentence would use the regular past tense rather than the negative construction. It would be: "Eilen söin ravintolassa, koska tein ruokaa kotona," meaning “Yesterday I ate at a restaurant because I made food at home.”