Learn Hardcore Finnish: Älkää unohtako hattua ja kaulaliinaa, kun lähdette lumeen leikkimään. - Don’t forget a hat and a scarf when you go out to play in the snow.

Älä = don’t (you, one person) – 2nd person singular
- Älä unohda hattua = Don’t forget your hat. (to one person)
Älkää = don’t (you, several people) – 2nd person plural / polite plural
- Älkää unohtako hattua = Don’t forget your hat. (to several people, e.g. children)

So in Älkää unohtako…, the speaker is talking to more than one person, like a parent speaking to a group of kids.

Why does the verb appear as unohtako and not unohtakaa or unohda?

You are seeing a special form used with the negative imperative:

Affirmative:
- 2nd plural imperative: Unohtakaa! = Forget!
Negative:
- Negative auxiliary (2nd pl.): Älkää
- Verb in imperative connegative form: unohtako

So:

Unohtakaa hattunne! = Forget your hats! (affirmative)
Älkää unohtako hattua! = Don’t forget your hats! (negative)

The -ko here is not the yes/no question clitic; it’s part of the imperative stem used in negative imperatives like älkää unohtako, älköön tehkö, etc.

Why are hattua and kaulaliinaa in the partitive case, not hattu and kaulaliina?

The objects appear in the partitive case (hattua, kaulaliinaa) because of negation.

In Finnish:

With a negative verb, the object is normally in the partitive:
- Unohdan hatun. = I forget the hat. (affirmative, total object → hatun)
- En unohda hattua. = I don’t forget the hat. (negative → hattua)

So here:

Älkää unohtako hattua ja kaulaliinaa…
→ The negation (älkää … unohtako) triggers partitive objects hattua and kaulaliinaa.

Where is the word “your” in this sentence? Why isn’t it written?

There is no separate word “your” in the Finnish sentence, but the meaning “your hat and (your) scarf” is clear from context:

Finnish often omits possessive pronouns (minun, sinun, teidän…) when the owner is obvious.
The people being addressed are the same ones who will wear the hat and scarf, so your is understood.

You could make the possession explicit:

Älkää unohtako hattuane ja kaulaliinanne.
or more natural: Älkää unohtako hattuanne ja kaulaliinanne.
= Don’t forget your hat and your scarf.

But in everyday speech, most Finns would simply say it the way you see in the sentence and let context carry the meaning of “your”.

Why is it kun lähdette with a present tense verb even though it means “when you go (will go)”?

Finnish usually uses the present tense where English uses the future:

kun lähdette literally = when you leave / when you go
but in context = when you go (later) / when you are going

In Finnish:

Future time is usually expressed with present tense + time context:
- Huomenna menen kouluun. = Tomorrow I’ll go to school.
- Kun lähdette lumeen leikkimään… = When you go to play in the snow…

So lähdette is present in form, but often future in meaning, just like English “When you go tomorrow…” uses present but refers to the future.

Why lähdette and not menette? Don’t they both mean “go”?

Both lähteä and mennä can translate as “to go”, but they focus on different things:

lähteä = to leave, to set off, to depart
mennä = to go (be going somewhere)

In this sentence, the nuance is:

kun lähdette lumeen leikkimään
= when you leave (the house / wherever you are) to go play in the snow

Using lähteä fits naturally because it’s about the moment of departure.
You could say kun menette lumeen leikkimään, and it would still be understandable, but lähdette sounds more like a parent speaking as the kids are about to leave.

Why is it lumeen and not lumessa or just lumessa leikkimään?

Lumeen is the illative case, which usually means “into something”:

lumi (snow)
lumeen = into the snow
lumessa = in the snow
lumella = on the snow

Here:

lähdette lumeen leikkimään
literally: you leave into-the-snow to play

It matches the English idea of “go out into the snow to play”.
The illative -een emphasizes entering that environment (going out into the snowy outdoors), not just being in it already.

What is the function of leikkimään, and why does it end in -mään?

Leikkimään is the third infinitive in the illative case. This form is very common after verbs of motion to show purpose:

mennä syömään = to go (in order) to eat
tulla katsomaan = to come (in order) to see
lähteä ostamaan = to leave (in order) to buy

Here:

lähdette lumeen leikkimään
= you leave into the snow to play (for the purpose of playing)

So the pattern is:

Motion verb (lähteä / mennä…) + verb in -maan / -mään
→ “go / leave to do X” (purpose).

How would the sentence change if I were talking to just one person instead of several?

For one person (informal you), you switch to singular imperative:

Älä unohda hattua ja kaulaliinaa, kun lähdet lumeen leikkimään.

Changes:

Älä instead of Älkää (singular vs plural “don’t”)
unohda instead of unohtako (2nd person singular imperative with negation)
lähdet instead of lähdette (2nd person singular present)

Everything else stays the same.

Is there a reason for the comma before kun? Could I leave it out?

In Finnish punctuation rules, a comma is normally used before a subordinate clause introduced by words like kun, että, koska etc., if the main clause comes first.

Älkää unohtako hattua ja kaulaliinaa, kun lähdette lumeen leikkimään.
Main clause: Älkää unohtako …
Subordinate clause: kun lähdette lumeen leikkimään

If you switched the order:

Kun lähdette lumeen leikkimään, älkää unohtako hattua ja kaulaliinaa.

You would also put a comma between the clauses. So the comma is expected and correct, not optional, in standard written Finnish.

Where is the word “out” (as in “go out to play in the snow”)? Is it implied?

Yes, the “out” is implicit in Finnish. The combination:

lähdette (you leave)
lumeen (into the snow)

together conveys the idea of “going out into the snow”.

Finnish doesn’t need a separate word like English “out” here. The idea of leaving the house or interior space is already contained in lähteä + a destination in the illative (lumeen).