Learn Hardcore Finnish: Vaikka hän on joskus laiska, hän silti saa työn valmiiksi ajoissa. - Although he is sometimes lazy, he still gets the work done on time.

In Finnish, vaikka can introduce a real concession (“although”), so the verb in that clause stays in the indicative when you talk about an actual situation. Using the conditional olisi would turn it into a hypothetical or counterfactual “even if he were sometimes lazy,” changing the nuance.

Why is työn in the genitive singular instead of the nominative?

Finnish marks a completed (telic) action on a singular direct object with the genitive case. In saa työn valmiiksi, the work is fully finished, so työ appears as työn. If the action were partial or ongoing, you’d use the partitive (työtä), but here it’s brought to completion.

What role does valmiiksi play, and why does it have the suffix -ksi?

The suffix -ksi on the adjective valmis (“ready”) creates an adverbial meaning “into a ready state” or “completely ready.” In saa työn valmiiksi, valmiiksi tells us the end result: the work is made finished.

Why is silti placed after hän, and what does it emphasize?

Silti is a sentence adverb meaning “still” or “nevertheless.” In Finnish, such adverbs often occupy the mid-position of the main clause—typically after the subject or first constituent. Placing silti after hän underscores the concession (“although… he nevertheless…”).

Why is ajoissa used to mean “on time,” and why isn’t it ajassa or aikaan?

Ajoissa is the plural inessive form of aika (“time”), used in a fixed adverbial idiom meaning “in good time” or “on time.” Singular inessive ajassa would literally mean “in the time,” but it isn’t used for this idiomatic sense. Aikaan (illative) means “into time” and appears in other temporal expressions, not as “on time.”

Could you say hän on laiska joskus instead of hän on joskus laiska?

Finnish word order is flexible, but hän on joskus laiska is the most natural for “he is sometimes lazy,” placing the frequency adverb joskus before the adjective. Hän on laiska joskus would still be understood but sounds marked or stylistic.

Why is there a comma after laiska in this sentence?

When a subordinate clause (here starting with vaikka) precedes the main clause, Finnish grammar requires a comma at the boundary. So you write Vaikka hän on joskus laiska, then continue with the main clause.

Why is it vaikka hän on and not vaikka että hän on?

In Finnish, you don’t use että after subordinate conjunctions like vaikka, koska, or kun. Vaikka alone introduces the clause, and adding että would be ungrammatical.

Can we omit silti, and would the meaning change?

Yes. Vaikka hän on joskus laiska, hän saa työn valmiiksi ajoissa. is perfectly grammatical. Omitting silti makes the sentence more neutral (“Although he is sometimes lazy, he gets the work done on time”). Silti adds an extra layer of surprise or emphasis on the result.