Tapasimme jossain keskustassa, mutta en muista missä.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Tapasimme jossain keskustassa, mutta en muista missä.

What exactly does “Tapasimme” mean, and what is its form?

Tapasimme comes from the verb tavata = to meet.

Grammatically, tapa-simme is:

  • past tense (imperfect)
  • 1st person plural (“we”)
  • affirmative (no negative marker)

So tapasimme means “we met” (once / at some specific time in the past).

In the present tense, it would be:

  • me tapaamme = we meet / we are meeting

Why is there no word for “we” in “Tapasimme”? Can I say “Me tapasimme”?

In Finnish, the personal ending on the verb already shows the subject:

  • tapa-simme → the -mme ending means “we”

Because of that, Finnish usually drops the pronoun when it’s clear from the verb.

You can say Me tapasimme jossain keskustassa, and it is:

  • grammatically correct
  • a bit more emphatic (like “We met somewhere in the center (not someone else)”)

But in a neutral sentence, just Tapasimme… is more typical.


Why do we have both “jossain” and “keskustassa”? Doesn’t “jossain” already mean “somewhere”?

Yes, jossain means “somewhere (in some place)”, but keskustassa tells you which general area that “somewhere” is in.

  • jossain = somewhere
  • keskustassa = in the city center / downtown (inessive case: “in”)

Put together:

  • jossain keskustassasomewhere in the city centre

So it’s not redundant; it’s like saying in English:

  • “We met somewhere downtown
    not just “We met somewhere” and not just “We met downtown”.

What is the difference between “jossain” and “jossakin”?

Functionally here, they mean the same thing: “somewhere (in)”.

  • jossain – a shorter, more colloquial form
  • jossakin – a slightly more formal / full form

Both are understood everywhere, and both can be used in this sentence:

  • Tapasimme jossain keskustassa…
  • Tapasimme jossakin keskustassa…

In everyday speech and informal writing, jossain is more common.


Why is it “keskustassa” and not just “keskusta” or “keskustaan”?

keskusta is the noun “(city) centre / downtown”. Finnish uses cases instead of prepositions like “in” or “to”.

  • keskusta – basic form (nominative) = “(the) centre”
  • keskustassa – inessive (“in”) = “in the center”
  • keskustaan – illative (“into / to”) = “to the center”

In this sentence you are describing location, not movement:

  • You are saying where you met, not where you were going, so you need the inessive:
    • keskustassa = in the city center.

If you talked about going there, you’d say:

  • Menimme keskustaan = We went to the city center.

Could the word order be “Tapasimme keskustassa jossain, mutta en muista missä”?

Yes, Tapasimme keskustassa jossain… is grammatically fine, but it sounds a bit less natural than jossain keskustassa in this particular sentence.

Typical, natural options:

  • Tapasimme jossain keskustassa, mutta en muista missä.
  • Tapasimme keskustassa jossain, mutta en muista missä. (OK, but slightly marked)

The difference is mostly rhythm and emphasis:

  • jossain keskustassa feels like one unit: somewhere-in-the-centre.
  • keskustassa jossain puts the main focus first on in the centre, then adds somewhere as an afterthought.

But both are understandable and correct.


Why is the conjunction “mutta” used and not “vaan”?

Finnish has two common words translated as “but”:

  • mutta – general “but”
  • vaan – “but rather / but instead”, used after a negative to correct or contrast something

In this sentence:

  • The first clause is not negative: Tapasimme jossain keskustassa… (We met…)
  • There is no correction like “not X, but Y”

So mutta is the right choice:

  • Tapasimme jossain keskustassa, mutta en muista missä.
    = We met somewhere in the centre, but I don’t remember where.

Example where vaan would be used:

  • Emme tavanneet keskustassa, vaan kotona.
    = We didn’t meet in the city centre, but rather at home.

How does “en muista” work grammatically? Why not something like “ei muistan”?

Finnish negation uses a special negative verb (en / et / ei / emme / ette / eivät) plus the main verb in its “connegative” form.

For muistaa (to remember), the negative forms are:

  • (minä) muistanen muista (I don’t remember)
  • (sinä) muistatet muista
  • (hän) muistaaei muista
  • (me) muistammeemme muista
  • (te) muistatteette muista
  • (he) muistavateivät muista

So:

  • en = I don’t
  • muista = remember (neutral form used with negation)

That’s why it’s en muista, not ei muistan.


Why is it just “missä” at the end? Where is the rest of the clause like “missä tapasimme”?

Here missä (“where”) introduces an indirect question / content clause:

  • Literally it stands for “where (we met)”, but Finnish can leave out the repeated part when it’s obvious from context.

Full version (more explicit, but usually not needed):

  • Tapasimme jossain keskustassa, mutta en muista, missä tapasimme.

Natural spoken/written Finnish drops the repeated part:

  • …mutta en muista, missä.
    = “…but I don’t remember where (we met).”

English does the same:

  • “We met somewhere in the city centre, but I don’t remember where.”
    (no need to repeat “we met”)

Why is it “missä” and not “mistä” or “mihin”?

The choice between missä / mistä / mihin depends on the type of location:

  • missä = where? (in / at some place) → static location
  • mistä = from where? (out of / from some place) → source
  • mihin = to where? (to / into some place) → destination

In Tapasimme jossain keskustassa, the meeting happened in a place, not going to or from it. So the implied question is:

  • Missä tapasimme? → Where did we meet?

Therefore the correct form in the second clause is:

  • …mutta en muista missä.

Could the sentence also be “Tapasimme jossain keskustassa, mutta en muista tarkalleen missä”? What does that change?

Yes, that is completely natural:

  • Tapasimme jossain keskustassa, mutta en muista tarkalleen missä.

Here tarkalleen (or tarkkaan) means “exactly / precisely”.

So the nuance becomes:

  • “We met somewhere in the centre, but I don’t remember exactly where.”

It emphasizes that you have a vague idea (city centre) but not the exact spot.