Learn Hardcore Finnish: Pomo kysyy, onko palaverihuone varattu ja onko tulostus jo valmis. - The boss asks whether the meeting room is reserved and whether the printing is already ready.

Onko huone varattu? = Is the room reserved? (direct question)
Pomo kysyy, onko huone varattu. = The boss asks whether the room is reserved. (indirect question)

So in this sentence, onko corresponds to English “whether … is” / “if … is”.

Why is there no word like “that” or “if/whether” after pomo kysyy?

In English, we say:

The boss asks *if/whether the meeting room is reserved.*

Finnish does not need a separate conjunction here. The “question word” onko itself already shows that this is an indirect yes/no question.

So instead of:

✗ pomo kysyy, että onko huone varattu (not natural here)

Finnish uses:

✓ pomo kysyy, onko huone varattu

After verbs of asking (e.g. kysyä), Finnish usually goes straight to the clause with onko, miksi, missä, etc., without että.

Why is onko repeated: onko palaverihuone varattu ja onko tulostus jo valmis? Could it be said only once?

The given sentence:

Pomo kysyy, onko palaverihuone varattu ja onko tulostus jo valmis.

is very clear: it explicitly asks two separate yes/no questions:

Is the meeting room reserved?
Is the printing already ready?

You can omit the second onko in everyday speech:

Pomo kysyy, onko palaverihuone varattu ja tulostus jo valmis.

This is also understood, but repeating onko is a bit clearer and more balanced stylistically, especially in writing. Both are grammatically correct; the version with two onko’s feels slightly more careful/explicit.

What does pomo mean, and is it formal?

Pomo means “boss”. It’s fairly informal, a bit like “the boss” or “my boss” in everyday speech.

More formal or neutral options are:

esimies – supervisor, manager (traditional term, still common)
esihenkilö – gender-neutral modern replacement for esimies in some contexts
johtaja – director, leader (often higher level)

So:

Pomo kysyy … = The boss asks … (colloquial, everyday)
In a formal text you might see:
Esimies kysyy, onko …

How is palaverihuone formed, and what does it literally mean?

Palaverihuone is a compound noun:

palaveri = a meeting (often informal or small-scale)
huone = room

Together: palaverihuone = meeting room.

Finnish often creates new words by simply joining nouns together:

palaveri + huone → palaverihuone
kokous + huone → kokoushuone (also “meeting room”)

No spaces are used inside the compound. A hyphen (-) is only used in some special cases (e.g. long or ambiguous compounds).

Why is varattu used instead of a simple present tense form?

Varattu is the past passive participle of varata (to reserve, to book), and it behaves like an adjective:

varattu huone = a reserved/booked room
huone on varattu = the room is (in a) reserved state

So in onko palaverihuone varattu, the structure is:

onko (is? – question form)
palaverihuone (the meeting room)
varattu (reserved/booked)

It’s very similar to English “Is the room booked?”, where booked is also a participle used as an adjective.

What’s the difference between varattu and varattuna?

Both come from varata (to reserve), but they’re used differently:

varattu = reserved, booked (adjectival participle)
- Huone on varattu. = The room is reserved.
varattuna = in a reserved state (essive case, focusing on the state or role)
- Huone on varattuna huomenna. = The room is booked (occupied) tomorrow.
- Pöytä oli varattuna meille. = The table was reserved for us.

In simple yes/no questions about availability, varattu is the normal choice:

Onko palaverihuone varattu? = Is the meeting room reserved?

Using varattuna here would sound odd or overly specific unless you’re emphasizing the state as such in a particular time frame.

What does tulostus mean exactly? Is it the same as “printout”?

Tulostus comes from the verb tulostaa (to print). It usually refers to:

the process or act of printing
sometimes the job that is being printed

Other related words:

tuloste = a printout, the physical printed document
tulostaminen = the action of printing (a more “-ing” noun, often interchangeable with tulostus in many contexts)

In this sentence:

onko tulostus jo valmis
→ is the printing / print job already ready / finished?

If you wanted to ask about the physical result, you might say:

Onko tuloste jo valmis? = Is the printout already ready?

What role does jo play in onko tulostus jo valmis?

Jo means “already” here.

onko tulostus valmis = is the printing ready?
onko tulostus jo valmis = is the printing already ready?

Adding jo implies that:

you expected it might be ready by now, or
you’re wondering if it’s done earlier than or by the time you’re asking.

It’s very similar to English use of already in this context.

Why is the word order tulostus jo valmis and not jo tulostus valmis?

The neutral word order is:

tulostus jo valmis
subject – adverb – adjective

This is the most natural/basic order for a yes/no clause:

Tulostus on jo valmis.
subject – verb – adverb – adjective

In questions with onko, the verb moves to the front, but the rest stays in neutral order:

Onko tulostus jo valmis?

You can move jo for emphasis in some contexts (e.g. Jo tulostus on valmis), but that sounds marked, poetic, or emphatic, not neutral. In everyday speech, tulostus jo valmis is the normal pattern.

Why is there a comma before onko in Pomo kysyy, onko palaverihuone varattu…?

Finnish uses a comma to separate a main clause from a subordinate clause.

Main clause: Pomo kysyy = The boss asks
Subordinate clause (indirect question): onko palaverihuone varattu ja onko tulostus jo valmis = whether the meeting room is reserved and whether the printing is already ready

So the structure is:

Pomo kysyy, [onko … ja onko …].

In Finnish, all subordinate clauses (including indirect questions with onko, missä, koska, etc.) are normally separated by a comma from the main clause.

Is onko here more like English “if” or “whether”?

Functionally, it covers both.

In English we might say:

The boss asks *if the room is reserved.*
The boss asks *whether the room is reserved.*

Finnish just uses onko:

Pomo kysyy, onko palaverihuone varattu.

There is also jos in Finnish, but jos is for conditional “if”:

Jos huone on varattu, mennään toiseen huoneeseen.
= If the room is reserved, we’ll go to another room.

So:

onko → introduces an indirect yes/no question (“if/whether … is”)
jos → introduces a condition (“if … then …”)

Why is kysyy in the present tense? Could it also be kysyi?

Both are possible, but they mean different things:

Pomo kysyy, … = The boss asks … (present tense)
- This can describe something happening right now, or a general repeated action.
Pomo kysyi, … = The boss asked … (past tense)
- A specific event in the past.

In Finnish, present tense can also be used in narratives to make the action feel more vivid, but in a simple example sentence like this, kysyy is just straightforward present tense. If you want to describe something that already happened, change it to kysyi.