Learn Hardcore Finnish: Kannattaako tilata pitsa vai laittaa ruokaa? - Is it worth ordering a pizza or cooking food?

Kannattaako = the verb kannattaa (to be worth it; to be advisable) + the question clitic -ko. It makes a yes/no question: Is it worth it (to)…? / Does it make sense (to)…? Here it’s an impersonal evaluation of options, not “Do I support…”.

Why is there no explicit subject like “it” or “I/we”?

Finnish often uses an impersonal construction for general evaluations: Kannattaako …? literally “Is it worth (to)…?” If you want to specify who it concerns, add a possessor-like pronoun:

Kannattaako minun tilata…? = Is it worth it for me to order…?
Kannattaako meidän tilata…? = Is it worth it for us to order…?

How do I say “Should I/Should we order a pizza or cook?” more directly?

More personal: Kannattaako minun tilata pitsa vai laittaa ruokaa?
More tentative/polite (conditional): Kannattaisiko minun tilata pitsa vai laittaa ruokaa?
“Should we…?” with the impersonal/passive: Tilataanko pitsa vai laitetaan ruokaa?
Using “should/ought to”: Pitäisikö minun/meidän tilata pitsa vai laittaa ruokaa?

What’s the nuance difference between kannattaako and kannattaisiko?

Kannattaako…? = neutral, present-time evaluation: is it (generally) worth it?
Kannattaisiko…? = conditional, softer and more hypothetical/polite: would it be worth it?

Why is it pitsa (base form) after tilata, not pitsan or pitsaa?

In the idiom kannattaa + infinitive, when you evaluate an activity in general, a countable object is often in the base form (nominative) to mean “a(n) …” in general: kannattaako tilata pitsa = “is it worth ordering a pizza (as an option, in general)”.

pitsaa (partitive) would mean “some pizza/any amount of pizza” and is also possible: Kannattaako tilata pitsaa…?
pitsan (genitive total object) targets a specific, bounded item and sounds odd here unless a particular pizza is already contextually fixed (e.g., “that Margherita we discussed”).

Why is it ruokaa (partitive) after laittaa?

Laittaa ruokaa is a set phrase meaning “to cook (some) food.” The partitive ruokaa presents an unbounded, indefinite amount. If you mean a specific meal, you can say laittaa ruoan (“prepare the meal”), but for the general activity of cooking, laittaa ruokaa is the norm.

Could I say tehdä ruokaa or kokata instead of laittaa ruokaa?

Yes:

laittaa ruokaa = very common, neutral “to cook.”
tehdä ruokaa = also common, neutral “to make/cook food.”
kokata = colloquial “to cook.”

Why is it vai and not tai?

Vai is used in direct questions that present alternatives (A or B?): …pitsa vai laittaa…?
Tai is the default “or” in statements and most other contexts. Using tai here would sound unnatural.

What does the -ko do, and where does it go?

-ko/-kö turns something into a yes/no question. In neutral yes/no questions, it attaches to the finite verb: kannattaako. You can attach it to other words to focus/contrast them, but that changes the emphasis (and can sound marked). Default: put it on the verb.

Is the word order fixed? Could I say “Kannattaako laittaa ruokaa vai tilata pitsa?”

Yes, you can swap the alternatives: Kannattaako laittaa ruokaa vai tilata pitsa? Both orders are fine; the first alternative may feel slightly more foregrounded, but there’s no big meaning change.

Does tilata only mean “to order,” or also “to subscribe/book”?

Tilata covers all of these: to order (food), to book/reserve (a table, a taxi), and to subscribe (to a magazine/service). Context disambiguates; with pitsa, it clearly means “order (a pizza).”

Is pitsa the only correct form, or can I write pizza?

Both exist. Pitsa is the fully Finnicized form; pizza is also widely accepted. Declension differs accordingly:

pitsa, pitsan, pitsaa, pitsoja
pizza, pizzan, pizzaa, pizzoja Choose one spelling and decline consistently.

How would I ask the same thing with “better” instead of “worth it”?

You can use parempi (better):
Onko parempi tilata pitsa vai laittaa ruokaa? = “Is it better to order a pizza or cook?”

Any quick pronunciation tips for tricky bits?

Double letters are long: nn, tt, and aa in kannattaako and laittaa are held longer.
ts in pitsa is a real [ts] cluster.
uo in ruokaa is a diphthong (one gliding vowel sound).
Keeping vowel length distinct is crucial for being understood.