Learn Hardcore Finnish: Minulla on vieläkin flunssa, mutta kurkussa on jo vähemmän kipua. - I still have a cold, but there is already less pain in the throat.

Minulla is the adessive case of minä (I), meaning roughly at me / on me.
on is the 3rd person singular of olla (to be).
flunssa is the illness.

Saying Olen flunssa would literally mean I am (a) flu, which is wrong and sounds very strange – you are not the illness itself, you have it.

This same pattern is used for many health states:

Minulla on kuumetta. – I have a fever.
Minulla on pää kipeä. – I have a headache.
Minulla on nälkä. – I am hungry. (literally: I have hunger)

What exactly does vieläkin mean, and how is it different from just vielä?

Both relate to the idea of “still” or “yet”, but:

vielä = still / yet
-kin is an enclitic particle that often adds emphasis or a nuance like “even”, “also”, “indeed”.

So:

Minulla on vielä flunssa. = I still have the flu.
Minulla on vieläkin flunssa. = I still have the flu / I even still have the flu.

vieläkin often sounds a bit stronger, like you are highlighting that, despite expectations, the situation continues:

As in: Ugh, I *still have this flu, even now.*

You could say either here; vieläkin just adds a slightly more emphatic “still”.

Why is there no word for “a” or “the” before flunssa or kipua?

Finnish has no articles (no a/an or the). Nouns appear without any dedicated article word.

So:

flunssa can mean a flu, the flu, or flu in general, depending on context.
kipua can mean some pain, the pain, pain (as a substance/amount).

English speakers must infer definiteness from:

Context
Word order
Sometimes possessive forms, etc.

In this sentence:

Minulla on vieläkin flunssa is translated as I still have the flu or I still have a cold, depending on what makes sense situationally.
kurkussa on jo vähemmän kipua = there is already less pain in (my) throat.

What case is kurkussa, and why is it used here?

kurkussa is the inessive case of kurkku (throat).

kurkku (nominative) → kurkussa (inessive, “in the throat”)
- -ssa / -ssä = in (location inside something)

It’s used because the structure is an existential clause:

kurkussa on kipua
Literally: In the throat is pain.

Finnish often expresses “There is X in Y” as Y + inessive + on + X:

Jääkaapissa on maitoa. – There is milk in the fridge.
Pöydällä on kirja. – There is a book on the table.
Kurkussa on kipua. – There is pain in the throat.

So kurkussa is saying in the throat in a grammatical, case-marked way.

Why does the second clause say kurkussa on jo vähemmän kipua instead of something like kurkkuni on jo vähemmän kipeä?

Both are grammatically possible, but they have different focuses:

kurkussa on jo vähemmän kipua
- Literally: In (the) throat is already less pain.
- Focus: the amount of pain as a measurable “stuff”.
- Sounds neutral and somewhat “medical”, describing a quantity: there is less pain present.
kurkkuni on jo vähemmän kipeä
- Literally: My throat is already less sore.
- Focus: the state/quality of the throat (how sore it is).
- More like talking about how your throat feels as an attribute.

In everyday speech, you’ll probably hear:

Kurkkuni on jo parempi. – My throat is already better.
or just Kurkku on jo parempi. (context makes clear it’s my throat)

The textbook sentence uses the existential + partitive structure to highlight less pain as a quantity.

What does jo mean here, and how does it relate to vieläkin?

jo means “already”.

In the sentence:

Minulla on vieläkin flunssa – I still have the flu. (it has not ended yet)
mutta kurkussa on jo vähemmän kipua – but there is already less pain in the throat. (a positive change has already begun)

So:

vieläkin → continuation of a negative/undesired state (flu is still there).
jo → emergence of a positive change (pain has already started to lessen).

This contrast (still … but already …) is very natural in Finnish:

Olen vielä töissä, mutta olen jo melkein valmis.
I’m still at work, but I’m already almost finished.

Why is kipua in the partitive case, not just kipu?

kipua is the partitive singular of kipu (pain).

Several reasons converge here:

After a quantity word:
- vähemmän (less) is a quantifier. In Finnish, quantifiers like
  paljon (a lot of), vähän (a little), enemmän (more), vähemmän (less)
  typically demand the partitive:
  - paljon vettä – a lot of water
  - enemmän rahaa – more money
  - vähemmän kipua – less pain
Uncountable / mass-like noun:
- Pain is treated like an uncountable “mass” here. The partitive fits that idea of a non-whole amount of something.
Existential clause with a “some amount” reading:
- In sentences of the type “There is X (some of it) in Y”, the partitive is often used:
  - Jääkaapissa on maitoa. – There is (some) milk in the fridge.
  - Kurussa on kipua. – There is (some) pain in the throat.

So vähemmän kipu would be wrong; you need vähemmän kipua.

What does vähemmän mean, and what form is it?

vähemmän means “less” (in the sense of a smaller amount, not “less adj.” like “less interesting”).

Formally:

It’s the comparative form of the adverb vähän (a little, few).
Pattern: vähän → vähemmän (less)

Usage:

With uncountable or mass nouns (in partitive):
- vähemmän vettä – less water
- vähemmän kipua – less pain
With countable nouns (still partitive):
- vähemmän ihmisiä – fewer people
- vähemmän kirjoja – fewer books

So in vähemmän kipua, it’s “less pain (than before)”.

Why is there no word like “my” in kurkussa? Shouldn’t it be minun kurkussani?

You can say minun kurkussani, but it’s usually unnecessary and sounds more explicit/emphatic than needed.

In Finnish:

Possession of body parts is often left unmarked when context is clear.
The listener naturally assumes the throat in question is the speaker’s throat.

So:

kurkussa on kipua is normally understood as there is pain in *my throat* when you’re speaking about your own health.
Saying minun kurkussani on kipua is possible but might sound:
- Emphatic (insisting it’s my throat, not someone else’s)
- Or more formal/clinical.

In everyday conversation about your own symptoms, kurkussa alone is very natural.

Why is the conjunction mutta used here, and could you use ja instead?

mutta means “but”, introducing a contrast.

In this sentence:

Clause 1: Something negative is still true → I still have the flu.
Clause 2: Something positive is also true → there is already less pain in my throat.

The speaker contrasts these:

I’m still sick, but things are improving.

If you used ja (“and”):

Minulla on vieläkin flunssa, ja kurkussa on jo vähemmän kipua.
This would sound more neutral, just listing two facts without highlighting the contrast as clearly.

mutta makes the improvement feel a bit more noteworthy against the unchanged illness.

Could you change the word order? For example, is Jo kurkussa on vähemmän kipua possible?

Word order in Finnish is relatively flexible, but changes often affect emphasis and naturalness.

kurkussa on jo vähemmän kipua – neutral, natural word order.
Theme → verb → focus:
- Place: kurkussa
- Verb: on
- New info: jo vähemmän kipua
Jo kurkussa on vähemmän kipua – possible, but sounds more marked/emphatic.
Here jo is moved to highlight already:
- Something like: Already in the throat there is less pain (perhaps unlike elsewhere).

For a basic learner sentence, kurkussa on jo vähemmän kipua is the recommended, straightforward order.

You could also sometimes hear:

Jo on vähemmän kipua kurkussa. – Very marked; emphasizes the change (“There really already is less pain in the throat now”). Not the default pattern.

What’s the difference between flunssa and nuha? Both are sometimes translated as “a cold”.

Both are related but not identical:

flunssa
- Usually translated as a (common) cold, sometimes loosely as flu.
- Refers to the illness as a whole: fever, tiredness, sore throat, runny nose, etc.
- More “systemic” feeling of being sick.
nuha
- Specifically means a runny/stuffy nose (nasal symptoms).
- You can have nuha without feeling otherwise very sick.

Examples:

Minulla on flunssa. – I’ve got a cold / I’m down with a cold.
Minulla on nuha. – I have a runny nose.
You can even say: Minulla on flunssa ja kova nuha. – I have a cold and a bad runny nose.

In your sentence, flunssa is the whole illness, not just nasal symptoms.

How would you give a very literal, word-for-word gloss of the whole sentence?

Breaking it down:

Minulla – at-me (adessive of minä)
on – is (3rd person singular of olla)
vieläkin – still (even still)
flunssa – flu/cold
mutta – but
kurkussa – in-(the)-throat (inessive of kurkku)
on – is
jo – already
vähemmän – less
kipua – pain-PART (some pain / an amount of pain)

So a very literal gloss would be:

“At me is still-flu, but in-throat is already less pain.”

Natural English:
“I still have the flu, but there’s already less pain in my throat.”