Learn Hardcore Finnish: Siskoni välttää sokeria, mutta juo teetä hunajan kanssa. - My sister avoids sugar, but drinks tea with honey.

The suffix -ni is a possessive ending meaning my. So sisko + -ni = my sister. Using the possessive suffix is the most compact, natural way to express possession here.

Is siskoni singular or plural? How can I tell?

By itself, siskoni can mean either my sister (singular) or my sisters (plural). You tell from the verb. Here the verbs are 3rd person singular (välttää, juo), so it must be singular. If it were plural, the verbs would be välttävät and juovat.

Can I also say minun siskoni?

Yes. Standard Finnish allows both:

siskoni (no pronoun)
minun siskoni (with a pronoun; the noun keeps the possessive suffix) Colloquially you may also hear mun sisko (dropping the suffix), but that’s not recommended in formal writing.

Why is sokeria in the partitive case?

Because it’s an indefinite, unbounded amount of a mass noun (sugar), and the verb välttää (to avoid) typically takes a partitive object when talking about avoiding something in general. The partitive here signals “sugar” as a generic substance rather than a specific, countable portion.

Can I say välttää sokerin instead?

You can, but it changes the nuance. Välttää sokerin sounds like avoiding a specific, identifiable sugar (for example, “avoid the sugar on the table”), or avoiding the whole of a defined amount. For the general habit “avoid sugar,” välttää sokeria is the idiomatic choice.

Why is teetä in the partitive?

With consumption verbs like juoda (to drink), the partitive is used for an unspecified amount: juo teetä = “drinks tea (some tea/in general).” If you mean a specific, delimited portion, you use the total object: juo teen = “drinks the tea” (a particular cup/serving).

Why does tee become teetä, not something like teeta?

Nouns ending in -e form the singular partitive with -tä and insert a t: tee → teetä, perhe → perhettä, koe → koetta. This is a regular pattern for so‑called e‑stems.

Why is it hunajan kanssa, not hunajaa kanssa?

Because kanssa (“with”) is a postposition that requires the genitive: hunaja → hunajan. So “with honey” is hunajan kanssa. A formal synonym is hunajan kera.

Could I use hunajalla instead of hunajan kanssa?

Usually no, not by itself. Hunajalla (adessive) can work in phrases like makeutettuna hunajalla (“sweetened with honey”), but to simply say “tea with honey,” Finnish uses teetä hunajan kanssa. Using hunajalla alone here would sound odd.

Could I make a compound like hunajatee?

Yes, hunajatee (“honey tea”) exists. Then you’d say juo hunajateetä (partitive) in this sentence. Both teetä hunajan kanssa and hunajateetä are acceptable; the compound frames it as a specific kind of tea.

Do I need the comma before mutta?

Yes. In standard Finnish, independent clauses joined by mutta (“but”) are separated with a comma: …, mutta …

Can I use vaan instead of mutta?

Not here. Vaan means “but rather” and is used to correct a preceding negation: Ei juo teetä, vaan kahvia (“Not tea, but coffee”). Without a negation, use mutta.

Why is it juo and not juu or joo?

Juo is the 3rd person singular of juoda (“to drink”): hän juo (“she/he drinks”). Joo/juu is a colloquial interjection meaning “yeah/yes,” not a verb form.

Can I repeat the subject or add hän in the second clause?

Yes. You can say Siskoni välttää sokeria, mutta hän juo… Repeating hän is optional and can add clarity or emphasis. It’s also fine to omit it, as in the original, because the subject is understood to be the same.

Can I change the word order or swap the clauses?

Yes, Finnish word order is flexible for emphasis:

Siskoni juo teetä hunajan kanssa, mutta välttää sokeria.
With focus-fronting: Sokeria siskoni välttää, mutta teetä hän juo hunajan kanssa. All are grammatical; the differences are about emphasis.

What case is hunajan, and how is it formed?

It’s the genitive singular of hunaja (“honey”): hunaja → hunajan (add -n; no consonant changes). The genitive is required by the postposition kanssa.