Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.

I mark the meeting in the calendar.

Breakdown of Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.

• minä: I
• kokous: the meeting
• kalenteri: the calendar
• -iin: into
• merkitä: to mark

Questions & Answers about Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.

What does each word in Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin correspond to in English, and what are their basic dictionary forms?

Word-by-word:

• Minä = I

  • Dictionary form: minä (first-person singular pronoun)

• merkitsen = I mark / I note (down) / I enter

  • Dictionary (infinitive) form: merkitä (to mark, to note, to mean)
  • merkitsen is the present tense, first person singular form.

• kokouksen = the meeting as a direct object

  • Dictionary form: kokous (meeting)
  • Form here: kokouksen (genitive/accusative singular – used here as a total object)

• kalenteriin = into the calendar

  • Dictionary form: kalenteri (calendar)
  • Form here: kalenteriin (illative case singular, expressing movement into something)

So the literal structure is: I mark the-meeting into-the-calendar.

Is it necessary to say Minä here, or could I just say Merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin?

You do not need Minä. Finnish usually drops subject pronouns because the verb ending already shows the person.

• Merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin. = I’ll put the meeting into the calendar.

Both sentences are correct:

• Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin. – pronoun included, often for emphasis on I.
• Merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin. – more neutral and typical in everyday speech.

You add Minä mainly when you want to stress who does it, for example in contrast:

• Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin, sinä hoidat sähköpostit.
  I will put the meeting in the calendar, you handle the emails.

What tense is merkitsen, and why does it often translate as I will mark instead of just I mark?

Merkitsen is present tense, first person singular.

In Finnish, the present tense is used for:

• Actions happening now
• Regular actions
• Very often for future actions as well

English normally distinguishes present (I mark) and future (I will mark). Finnish doesn’t have a separate future tense; context does the work.

So:

• Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin can be:
  • I am marking the meeting in the calendar (now).
  • I will mark the meeting in the calendar (later).

In most realistic contexts, this sentence is a plan/decision, so English naturally uses will or going to.

What is the dictionary form of merkitsen, and how is it conjugated?

The dictionary (infinitive) form is merkitä.

Present tense indicative:

• (minä) merkitsen = I mark
• (sinä) merkitset = you mark (singular)
• hän merkitsee = he/she marks
• (me) merkitsemme = we mark
• (te) merkitsette = you mark (plural/polite)
• he merkitsevät = they mark

The stem is merkitse-:

• merkitse-
  • n → merkitsen
• merkitse-
  • t → merkitset
• merkitse-
  • e → merkitsee (the e + e fuse into a long ee in writing)

No consonant gradation is happening here; you just add personal endings to merkitse-.

Why is it kokouksen and not kokous or kokousta?

Kokouksen is the genitive singular form of kokous and is used here as a total object (also called the genitive/accusative object for a complete action).

Compare:

• Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.
  → I will (completely) enter the meeting into the calendar.
  The meeting is a clearly bounded thing; the action has a clear endpoint.

• kokous (nominative) would not be used as a direct object in this kind of sentence.

• kokousta (partitive) would suggest an incomplete, ongoing, or unbounded action, which doesn’t fit well with a concrete “enter the meeting in the calendar” idea.

So kokouksen marks the meeting as a whole, affected object of the verb – the typical choice for this sentence.

When would a partitive object like kokousta be used instead of kokouksen?

You would use kokousta (partitive) when the action is:

• Ongoing / incomplete
• Repeated or habitual in a way where the object is not seen as a whole
• Negated
• Quantitatively unbounded

Examples:

• Odotan kokousta.
  I am waiting for the meeting.
  → Actually uses genitive kokousta? No, here it’s kokousta (partitive) because waiting is ongoing.

• En merkitsen kokousta kalenteriin. (actually correct: En merkitse kokousta kalenteriin.)
  I do not enter the meeting into the calendar.
  → Negation triggers the partitive kokousta.

• Merkitsen kokouksia kalenteriin.
  I (regularly) enter meetings in the calendar.
  → Plural partitive, kokouksia, for “some meetings / meetings in general”.

In your sentence, one specific meeting is being fully entered, so kokouksen is the natural choice.

What case is kalenteriin, and what does that ending -iin mean?

Kalenteriin is in the illative case (singular), which expresses movement into something.

Formation from kalenteri:

• Stem: kalenteri-
• Illative singular ending: often -in, but because of vowel lengthening rules, kalenteri + in becomes kalenteriin (with long ii).

Meaning contrast:

• kalenteri = calendar (basic form)
• kalenteriin = into the calendar
• kalenterissa = in the calendar
• kalenterista = out of the calendar
• kalenterille = onto the calendar (onto a surface, more literal)

In this sentence, we are metaphorically moving the meeting into the calendar, so the illative makes sense: kokouksen kalenteriin = the meeting into the calendar.

Could I say Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenterissa instead of kalenteriin?

No, that would change or break the meaning.

• kalenteriin (illative) = into the calendar (movement → a new entry)
• kalenterissa (inessive) = in the calendar (location, no movement)

Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.
→ I will put/enter the meeting into the calendar.

If you say:

• Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenterissa.

it sounds like you are physically marking the meeting inside the calendar (as a location), which is not what you want. For making an entry, use kalenteriin.

How flexible is the word order in Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin?

Finnish word order is fairly flexible; endings indicate who does what. You can reorder for emphasis:

• Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.
  Neutral, slight emphasis on I.

• Merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.
  Very neutral, typical.

• Kokouksen merkitsen kalenteriin.
  Emphasis on kokouksen (it’s the meeting that I’ll enter).

• Kalenteriin merkitsen kokouksen.
  Emphasis on kalenteriin (into the calendar is the important part).

All are grammatical; the default “all-new-information” neutral order is usually:

[subject] [verb] [object] [place/direction]
→ (Minä) merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.

Does Finnish have articles like a or the in the meeting or a meeting?

Finnish has no articles (no a/an or the). Words like kokous, kokouksen, and kalenteriin can correspond to:

• a meeting / the meeting
• a calendar / the calendar

Context decides the specificity. In typical usage:

• Minä merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.
  → Usually understood as I’ll put the meeting in the calendar, because the speaker and listener both already know which meeting and which calendar are being talked about.

If you really needed to emphasize something like a certain meeting, you would use other means (adjectives, context, word order), not articles.

Is merkitsen the only natural verb here, or are there common alternatives?

Merkitsen is correct and neutral, but other verbs are very common in everyday speech:

• Minä laitan kokouksen kalenteriin.
  I’ll put the meeting into the calendar. (laittaa = to put) – very common colloquial choice.

• Minä kirjaan kokouksen kalenteriin.
  I’ll enter / record the meeting in the calendar. – slightly more formal or “official”.

• Minä merkkaan kokouksen kalenteriin.
  Colloquial variant of merkitä (merkata/merkka-), spoken language.

All of these are natural; merkitsen and laitan are probably the most common neutral choices in many contexts.

Does merkitsen also mean I mean (as in “I mean that…”), since merkitä can mean to mean?

Yes, merkitä can mean to mean, to signify, but that use is usually more abstract and likes different structures.

For to mean, the subject is often something like a word, symbol, or situation:

• Tämä sana merkitsee samaa kuin “kokous”.
  This word means the same as kokous.

In your sentence, the structure merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin clearly matches the to mark / to enter meaning:

• [someone] + merkitä + [thing] + [destination]
  → physical or metaphorical marking/entering.

If you said:

• Minä merkitsen, että...

you could in some context be understood as I note (down) that…, but I mean that… is more often tarkoitan, että… from tarkoittaa (to mean).

Is the sentence formal or informal, and would it sound natural in everyday conversation?

The sentence is neutral standard Finnish. It’s fine in both spoken and written language.

In informal spoken Finnish, people often:

• Drop minä:
  Merkitsen kokouksen kalenteriin.

• Or use a more colloquial verb:

  • Laitan kokouksen kalenteriin.
  • Merkkaan kokouksen kalenteriin.

All of these are natural; your original sentence is perfectly acceptable in normal conversation, email, or even quite formal contexts.