Learn Hardcore Finnish: Tässä ei ole kyse leikistä, vaan hyvästä järjestyksestä. - This is not about playing; it is about good order.

Tässä literally means “in this (situation / context / place right here)”. In this sentence it’s best understood as “here / in this case / in this situation”.

Tämä = this (thing), used as a pronoun:
- Tämä on kirja. – This is a book.
Tässä = in this / at this, used as an adverb-like form:
- Tässä on kirja. – Here is a book. / Here’s the book.
- Tässä ei ole kyse leikistä… – In this situation it’s not about a game…
Täällä = here (in this place, more general area):
- Täällä on kylmä. – It’s cold here.

So in this sentence, Tässä points to this situation/issue we are talking about, not a physical object.

How does the expression olla kyse jostakin work grammatically?

Olla kyse jostakin is a fixed expression meaning “to be about something / to be a matter of something”.

olla = to be
kyse = a noun meaning the matter at hand, what it’s about
jostakin = from/about something, here in the elative case (-sta/-stä)

Pattern:

(Tästä) on kyse jostakin. – (This) is about something.
Tässä ei ole kyse leikistä. – Here it is not about a game.

The thing it’s “about” is put in the elative case (-sta/-stä):

leikistä – about a game/play
hyvästä järjestyksestä – about good order

So the core structure is:
olla kyse + [NOUN in elative] → “to be about [NOUN]”.

Why are leikistä and järjestyksestä in the elative case (-sta/-stä)?

Because the expression olla kyse jostakin always takes its complement in the elative case.

leikki → leikistä (from/about a game)
järjestys → järjestyksestä (from/about order)

The elative (-sta/-stä) is used with kyse to mark what the matter is about.

So:

Tässä ei ole kyse leikistä
= This is not about a game / play.
…vaan hyvästä järjestyksestä
= …but (it’s) about good/proper order.

Think of it as:
olla kyse + [noun in elative] = be about [noun].

Why do we say ei ole kyse leikistä instead of something like ei ole leikki?

They express different ideas:

Tämä ei ole leikki.
= This is not a game.
→ Identifies what “this” is or is not; very direct, often emotional / emphatic.
Tässä ei ole kyse leikistä.
= This is not about a game / This is not a question of play.
→ Focuses on what the issue is about, the nature of the matter, a bit more abstract and formal.

Olla kyse jostakin sounds more like

“this matter concerns X / is a question of X / is about X”
rather than just “this is X”.

So the sentence is saying:
The issue here is not playfulness; the issue here is proper order.

What nuance does ei ole kyse leikistä have? Is it always about seriousness?

Ei ole kyse leikistä often implies seriousness, yes. It suggests:

This is not something trivial or playful.
The matter is serious / important / formal.

Depending on context, it can be translated as:

This is not a game.
This is not about having fun.
We’re not just fooling around here.

So the nuance is: “Don’t treat this lightly; the real issue is something serious (good order, rules, discipline, etc.).”

How is vaan different from mutta in this sentence?

In Finnish:

mutta = but (general contrast)
vaan = but rather / instead, used after a negative to correct or replace something.

Because the first part is negative (ei ole kyse leikistä), the contrast is of the “not X, but (rather) Y” type, so Finnish uses vaan:

Ei ole kyse leikistä, vaan hyvästä järjestyksestä.
= It’s not about play, but (rather) about good order.

You would use:

mutta when both sides can be true or you’re just contrasting:
- On kylmä, mutta aurinko paistaa. – It’s cold, but the sun is shining.
vaan when you say “not A, but B instead”:
- Se ei ole kahvia, vaan teetä. – That’s not coffee but tea.

So here vaan is exactly the right choice.

Why is hyvästä järjestyksestä in the same case as leikistä?

Because vaan hyvästä järjestyksestä completes the same grammatical pattern started by olla kyse.

We have:

olla kyse jostakin → requires elative case (-sta/-stä).

First part:

leikistä (elative) – about a game

Second part:

hyvästä järjestyksestä (also elative) – about good order

The idea is:

…ei ole kyse leikistä, vaan (on kyse) hyvästä järjestyksestä.

The verb phrase on kyse is only said once, but logically it applies to both complements, so they are both in the elative case.

Could I say Tämä ei ole leikkiä, vaan (se on) hyvä järjestys? Would that mean the same thing?

You could, but it would be a different structure and nuance:

Tämä ei ole leikkiä, vaan (se on) hyvä järjestys.
= This is not play, but (it is) good order.

Differences:

Grammar and cases
- leikkiä is partitive
- järjestys is nominative
  → You’re saying what “this” is or is not.
Nuance
- Focus is on what this is (identity): not play → (but) good order.
- With ei ole kyse leikistä, focus is on what the matter is about.
Style
- Tämä ei ole leikkiä… feels more direct and emotional.
- Tässä ei ole kyse leikistä… feels slightly more formal / abstract (about the nature of the issue).

They can be similar in meaning in some contexts, but they’re not interchangeable in all situations.

Could the word order be Kyse ei ole leikistä, vaan hyvästä järjestyksestä? Is that more common?

Yes, that word order is also correct and very natural:

Kyse ei ole leikistä, vaan hyvästä järjestyksestä.

Meaning is essentially the same: It’s not a question of play, but of good order.

Difference in nuance:

Tässä ei ole kyse leikistä…
→ Starts by emphasizing “in this situation / here”.
Kyse ei ole leikistä…
→ Starts by emphasizing “the issue itself”: “What this is about is not play…”

Both are fine; context and style decide which sounds better.

Is kyse the subject of olla in ei ole kyse?

In this idiomatic structure, Finnish grammars may analyze it slightly differently, but for a learner it’s enough to treat:

kyse as the main noun (the “matter”)
olla as the verb

Often in impersonal sentences like:

Tässä ei ole kyse leikistä.
there is no explicit subject like “it”.

You can think of it as roughly corresponding to English:

There is no question of a game here.
It’s not about a game here.

So: kyse behaves like the core noun of the expression, not like a “normal subject pronoun” (there is none).

Is there a difference between olla kyse and olla kysymys?

Yes, they are close in meaning but not identical in usage:

olla kyse jostakin
- Very common, modern, neutral.
- Means “to be about something” / “to be a matter of something”.
- Example:
  - Tässä on kyse rahasta. – This is about money.
olla kysymys jostakin
- A bit more formal or old-fashioned sounding.
- Also “to be a question / matter of something”, but feels more written or formal.
- Example:
  - Tässä on kysymys rahasta.

In everyday speech, olla kyse is usually more natural.

What is the difference between leikki and peli in Finnish, since both can be “game” in English?

Roughly:

leikki = play, playing, make-believe, kids’ play
- Lapset leikkivät. – The children are playing.
- Tämä ei ole leikki(ä). – This is not a game / this is not child’s play.
peli = (structured) game, match, contest
- pelata peliä – to play a game
- jalkapallopeli – football game/match

So in ei ole kyse leikistä, using leikki emphasizes “this is not play / not fooling around” rather than “this is not a sports match or board game.” It targets playfulness, childishness, or not taking things seriously.