Minusta on tärkeää, että jokainen saa rakastaa ketä haluaa ja puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Minusta on tärkeää, että jokainen saa rakastaa ketä haluaa ja puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti.

What does minusta mean here, and why does it have the ending -sta?

Minusta is literally “from me” (the elative case of minä, I), but in this structure it means “I think / in my opinion”.

Finnish often uses elative (-sta / -stä) to express where an opinion or assessment comes from:

  • Minusta on tärkeää… = I think it is important… (literally: From me it is important…)
  • Sinusta on tylsää… = You think it’s boring…

So minusta here doesn’t mean physical movement “from me”, but “from my point of view”.


What is the difference between minusta on tärkeää, minun mielestäni on tärkeää, and minulle on tärkeää?

All three are grammatical, but they do slightly different things:

  1. Minusta on tärkeää, että…

    • Idiomatic way to say “I think it is important that…”
    • Focus: your opinion about something in general.
  2. Minun mielestäni on tärkeää, että…

    • Literally “in my opinion, it is important that…”
    • Very close in meaning to minusta on tärkeää.
    • Slightly more explicit/“formal opinion-sounding”, but in everyday speech you’ll also hear the shorter mielestäni on tärkeää….
  3. Minulle on tärkeää, että…

    • Literally “It is important to me that…”
    • Focus: it is personally important for you, emotionally or practically, not just an abstract opinion.

So:

  • minusta / mielestäni on tärkeääI think it’s important (in general)
  • minulle on tärkeääit matters to me personally

Why is it tärkeää and not tärkeä?

Tärkeää is the partitive singular of tärkeä (important).

In Finnish, the adjective used as a complement (predicative) of olla (to be) can appear in nominative or partitive. For abstract or “open-ended” statements like:

  • On tärkeää, että…
  • On hyvä, että…
  • On mahdollista, että…

the predicative is almost always in partitive. This often happens when the complement is a clause (an että-clause) rather than a concrete, counted thing.

So:

  • On tärkeää, että jokainen saa… = It is important that everyone can… (general, abstract idea)

Using tärkeä here would sound ungrammatical or at least very odd.


What does että do in this sentence, and can you leave it out?

Että is a subordinating conjunction meaning “that” (in the sense of “I think that…”).

Structure:

  • Minusta on tärkeää, että jokainen saa rakastaa…
    • Main clause: Minusta on tärkeää
    • Subordinate clause: että jokainen saa rakastaa…

You cannot leave out että in this kind of sentence.

  • Minusta on tärkeää, jokainen saa rakastaa… ❌ (wrong)
  • Minusta on tärkeää, että jokainen saa rakastaa…

So että introduces the whole idea that is being judged as “important”.


Why is it jokainen saa and not jokaiset saavat or kaikki saavat?

Jokainen means “each / everyone (each person)” and is grammatically singular, so it takes a singular verb:

  • jokainen saa = everyone gets/is allowed (lit. each one gets)

There is no form jokaiset in standard Finnish.

You could also say:

  • kaikki saavat rakastaa… = everyone (all) can/is allowed to love…

Difference in nuance:

  • jokainen emphasizes each individual: each and every person.
  • kaikki emphasizes the group as a whole: all people.

In this kind of rights/freedoms sentence, jokainen feels a bit more individual-focused and is very natural.


What exactly does saa mean here? Is it “gets”, “can”, or “is allowed to”?

Saa is the 3rd person singular of saada. It can mean:

  • to get/receive (concrete):
    • Hän saa lahjan. = He/she gets a present.
  • to be allowed to / may (permission):
    • Hän saa mennä. = He/she is allowed to go / may go.

In this sentence:

  • jokainen saa rakastaa… ja puhua…

saa is used in the permission/rights sense:

  • “everyone is allowed to love… and (is allowed to) speak…”
    → Similar to English may / has the right to / is free to.

Using voi (can, is able to) would focus more on ability rather than permission or right.


Why is it ketä and not kuka after rakastaa?

Ketä is the partitive form of kuka (who).

The verb rakastaa (to love) always takes its object in the partitive case:

  • rakastan sinua = I love you.
  • rakastamme heitä = We love them.

So when you use “who(ever)” as the object of rakastaa, it must also be in partitive:

  • rakastaa ketä haluaato love whoever one wants (whomever one wants)

Kuka (nominative) would be the subject form (“who is doing something”), not the correct case for the object of rakastaa.

You may also see:

  • rakastaa ketä tahansa = to love whoever / anyone (at all) one wants

but the key point is: rakastaa + partitive object ⇒ ketä, not kuka.


Who is the subject of haluaa in ketä haluaa, and why is it not repeated?

In the sentence:

  • …että jokainen saa rakastaa ketä haluaa…

the understood subject of haluaa is jokainen (everyone). Finnish does not need to repeat it:

  • literally: “that everyone is allowed to love whom (he/she) wants”

We could spell it out more fully:

  • että jokainen saa rakastaa ketä hän haluaa

but Finnish very often drops the repeated subject pronoun when it’s clear from context.

So:

  • ketä haluaa = who(ever) he/she wants
  • the “he/she” is just understood from jokainen earlier.

What is going on with mielipiteestään? Why that form and not just mielipide?

Mielipiteestään breaks down like this:

  • mielipide = opinion
  • mielipiteestä = from/about the opinion (elative singular: -stä / -stä)
  • mielipiteestään = from/about his/her/their opinion (elative + 3rd person possessive -än)

Two key grammar points:

  1. The verb puhua + elative

    • puhua jostakin = to talk about something
    • So we need elative: mielipiteestä (about an opinion).
  2. Possessive suffix for “one’s own opinion”

    • Subject: jokainen (everyone).
    • Their own opinion: mielipiteestään (about his/her/their own opinion).

So puhua mielipiteestään literally means “to speak about his/her/their (own) opinion”.

Just mielipide would be the basic dictionary form and not in the right case, and it would also miss the possessor (whose opinion?).


Why is the possessive suffix in mielipiteestään the “3rd person” form if English uses “their”?

Finnish doesn’t have grammatical gender, and for “their own” referring to “everyone / each person”, it uses the 3rd person singular possessive suffix -nsa / -nsä / -aan / -ään:

  • jokainen (everyone) → possessor is 3rd person (he/she/they in English)
  • mielipiteestään = about his/her/their opinion

English uses singular they here for gender-neutrality (“their opinion”), but structurally it is closest to Finnish 3rd person.

So even if you translate it as “their opinion”, grammatically in Finnish it’s 3rd person (his/her) possessive attached to the noun.


How is vapaasti formed, and what is the difference between vapaa and vapaasti?

Vapaasti is an adverb formed from the adjective vapaa (free).

  • vapaa = free (adjective):
    • vapaa maa = a free country
  • vapaasti = freely (adverb):
    • puhua vapaasti = to speak freely

The ending -sti is a common way to turn adjectives into adverbs in Finnish:

  • nopea → nopeasti (fast → quickly)
  • selvä → selvästi (clear → clearly)

So vapaasti here describes how one speaks: freely.


Could the word order be puhua vapaasti mielipiteestään instead of puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti?

Yes, both are grammatically correct:

  • puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti
  • puhua vapaasti mielipiteestään

Finnish word order is quite flexible, especially with adverbs like vapaasti.

Nuance:

  • puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti – slightly neutral, lists “about one’s opinion” and then adds how (freely).
  • puhua vapaasti mielipiteestään – may place a tiny bit more emphasis on vapaasti (“to speak freely about one’s opinion”).

But in everyday usage, the difference is minor, and both sound fine.


Why is it rakastaa ketä haluaa ja puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti and not rakastaa ja puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti ketä haluaa?

The current order clearly groups what belongs with what:

  • rakastaa ketä haluaa = to love whoever one wants
  • puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti = to speak freely about one’s opinion

If you moved ketä haluaa to the very end:

  • …rakastaa ja puhua mielipiteestään vapaasti ketä haluaa

it becomes confusing: it can sound like “speak freely about his/her opinion whoever he/she wants”, which doesn’t really make sense.

So the original order keeps the two ideas parallel and clear:

  1. love whomever you want
  2. speak freely about your opinion