032
Log inSign up

Lapsen korva on kipeä ja suu on kuiva.

Lapsen korva on kipeä ja suu on kuiva.
The child’s ear is sore and the mouth is dry.

Breakdown of Lapsen korva on kipeä ja suu on kuiva.

olla
to be
ja
and
lapsi
the child
kipeä
sore
kuiva
dry
korva
the ear
suu
the mouth
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Lapsen korva on kipeä ja suu on kuiva.

Why is it lapsen and not lapsi at the beginning?

Lapsi is the base form (nominative singular) meaning child.
Lapsen is the genitive form, which is used for possession: the child’s.

In Finnish, you usually show possession with the genitive case of the owner + the thing owned in the normal nominative form:

  • lapsen korva = the child’s ear
  • opettajan kirja = the teacher’s book
  • koiran talo = the dog’s house

So lapsen korva literally means the child’s ear, which is why lapsen (genitive) is used instead of lapsi.

How do you get from lapsi to lapsen?

The noun lapsi (child) makes its genitive by:

  1. Changing the final i to e
  2. Adding -n

So:

  • lapsi → lapse
    • n → lapsen

This i → e + n pattern is very common for words ending in -i where the second-to-last letter is a consonant:

  • vesi (water) → veden (of the water)
  • ovi (door) → oven (of the door)
Why is it korva and not something like korvan or korvaa?

Here korva (ear) is the grammatical subject of the verb on (is). Subjects appear in the nominative case, which is the basic dictionary form:

  • Korva on kipeä. = The ear is sore.

The word lapsen is just a genitive attribute showing whose ear it is, but the actual subject is korva, so it stays in nominative:

  • lapsen korva → the child’s ear (subject, nominative: korva)

Forms like korvan or korvaa are other cases (genitive, partitive) and would not be used here for the subject.

Why is kipeä in this form and not something like kipeän or kipeää?

Kipeä is an adjective used as a predicate after on (is). In Finnish, when you have:

  • subject (nominative) + olla (to be) + adjective,

the adjective is normally also in the nominative and agrees only in number (singular/plural) with the subject, not in case:

  • Korva on kipeä. (singular) – The ear is sore.
  • Korvat ovat kipeät. (plural) – The ears are sore.

So korva (subject) is nominative singular, and kipeä (predicate adjective) is also nominative singular.

Forms like kipeän (genitive) or kipeää (partitive) are used in different constructions, but not in this basic “X is Y” structure.

How would the sentence change if I want to say “The child’s ears are sore” (plural)?

You would make both the noun and the adjective plural:

  • Lapsen korvat ovat kipeät ja suu on kuiva.
    = The child’s ears are sore and (the) mouth is dry.

Changes:

  • korva → korvat (plural subject)
  • on → ovat (plural of on, 3rd person plural)
  • kipeä → kipeät (plural adjective agreeing with plural subject)

The second clause stays the same if the mouth is just one mouth and still singular.

Why is there no word for “the” or “a” in this sentence?

Finnish does not have separate articles like a/an or the. Definiteness (whether you mean a child vs the child) is understood from context, word order, and what has been mentioned earlier.

So lapsen korva can be understood as:

  • the child’s ear
  • the ear of the child

There is no grammatical difference between “a child’s ear” and “the child’s ear” in Finnish; both are lapsen korva, and the context decides which is meant.

What is the difference between Lapsen korva on kipeä and Lapsella on kipeä korva?

Both can describe a child whose ear is sore, but the focus and structure differ:

  1. Lapsen korva on kipeä.
    Literally: The child’s ear is sore.

    • Subject: korva (ear)
    • Possessor: lapsen (child’s)
    • Focus is on the ear as something that is sore.

  2. Lapsella on kipeä korva.
    Literally: The child has a sore ear.

    • Lapsella is the child in the adessive case (“on the child” / “at the child”).
    • This is the usual Finnish “X has Y” structure: X-lla on Y.
    • Focus is more on the child having this problem.

Both are correct, but Lapsella on kipeä korva often sounds more natural when talking about someone’s symptoms. Even more idiomatic for pain is:

  • Lasta sattuu korvaan. – The child’s ear hurts. (Literally: It hurts into the child’s ear.)
Why is the verb on repeated in korva on kipeä ja suu on kuiva? Can you leave the second on out?

The full form with repetition is:

  • Lapsen korva on kipeä ja suu on kuiva.

You can omit the second on in everyday speech and writing:

  • Lapsen korva on kipeä ja suu kuiva.

This is still grammatical and understandable. The omitted on is “heard” in your mind. However:

  • Repeating on is a bit clearer and slightly more neutral/formal.
  • Leaving it out makes the sentence a bit more compact, commonly seen in informal text or when listing several things.

Both versions are correct.

Could I say Lapsen korva on kipeä ja se on kuiva instead of suu on kuiva?

No, that would be confusing and likely wrong in meaning.

  • Se (it) would refer back to the nearest logical singular noun, which is korva (ear).
  • So Lapsen korva on kipeä ja se on kuiva would be understood as The child’s ear is sore and it is dry – talking about the ear both times, not the mouth.

To talk about the mouth, Finnish normally names it explicitly:

  • ... ja suu on kuiva. – and (the) mouth is dry.
  • Or, if context is very clear, you might repeat lapsen: ja lapsen suu on kuiva.

Using se to refer to suu here would be odd because suu hasn’t been mentioned before in the sentence.

Why is suu also in the basic form (not suun or suuta)?

In the second clause:

  • suu is the subject (mouth)
  • on is the verb (is)
  • kuiva is the predicate adjective (dry)

Subjects of olla (to be) are in the nominative:

  • Suu on kuiva. – The mouth is dry.

So suu is nominative, just like korva in the first clause.
Forms like suun (genitive) or suuta (partitive) would have different functions (possession, partial object, etc.) and don’t fit the simple “X is Y” structure.

Why is it kuiva and not kuivaa?

Kuiva (dry) is a predicate adjective after on, describing the subject suu. In this pattern:

  • subject (nominative) + olla
    • adjective (nominative),

the adjective appears in the nominative:

  • Suu on kuiva. – The mouth is dry.

You would use kuivaa (partitive) in other types of constructions, e.g.:

  • Hän juo kuivaa viiniä. – He/she is drinking dry wine.
    (Here kuivaa modifies viiniä, which is partitive.)

But in a simple “X is Y” statement, kuiva is correct.

Is the word order fixed? Could I say Korva on kipeä lapsen ja suu on kuiva?

The basic, natural word order here is:

  • Lapsen korva on kipeä ja suu on kuiva.

The suggested Korva on kipeä lapsen... is ungrammatical in this meaning. In Finnish, the possessor usually directly precedes the noun it owns, in the genitive:

  • lapsen korva (child’s ear)
  • lapsen suu (child’s mouth)

If you want to move words around for emphasis, you can do things like:

  • Kipeä on lapsen korva ja kuiva on suu.
    (Very marked, poetic or emphatic word order.)

But you cannot split lapsen away from korva and leave lapsen hanging at the end like in English “the ear is sore of the child”.

Could I add a possessive suffix, like lapsen korvansa or lapsen suunsa?

In theory, yes, Finnish has possessive suffixes, and you might see forms like:

  • lapsen korvansa – the child’s own ear
  • lapsen suunsa – the child’s own mouth

However, in modern standard Finnish this combination (lapsen + noun + possessive suffix) often sounds old-fashioned, literary, or very emphatic. Normally, everyday language uses either:

  1. Just the genitive owner:

    • lapsen korva, lapsen suu

  2. Or just the possessive suffix, if the owner is obvious from context:

    • hänen korvansa – his/her ear
    • hänen suunsa – his/her mouth

Using both at once is possible but marked in style. For a learner and for neutral style, Lapsen korva on kipeä ja suu on kuiva is the best choice.