Siksi otan aina mukaan aineen, joka karkottaa hyttysiä.

That’s why I always take along a substance that repels mosquitoes.

Breakdown of Siksi otan aina mukaan aineen, joka karkottaa hyttysiä.

• joka: that
• ottaa mukaan: to take along
• aina: always
• siksi: that's why
• hyttynen: the mosquito
• aine: the substance
• karkottaa: to repel

Questions & Answers about Siksi otan aina mukaan aineen, joka karkottaa hyttysiä.

What exactly does siksi mean, and why is it at the beginning of the sentence?

Siksi is an adverb meaning for that reason / because of that / that’s why.

It usually refers back to something mentioned in the previous sentence or context, like:

• Olen allerginen hyttysille. Siksi otan aina mukaan aineen...
  I’m allergic to mosquitoes. That’s why I always take along a substance...

Putting siksi first is normal and emphasizes the reason–result structure:

• Siksi otan... = That’s why I take...

You could move it later (Otan siksi aina mukaan aineen...), but the most natural and common place is at or near the beginning, just like “That’s why I…” in English.

Why is it otan and not minä otan? Is the subject pronoun just omitted?

Yes. In Finnish, the personal ending on the verb (-n in otan) already tells you the subject is “I”:

• otan = I take
• otat = you (sg) take
• ottaa = he / she / it takes

So adding minä is usually unnecessary:

• Otan aina mukaan aineen... = Minä otan aina mukaan aineen...

You can say minä otan if you want to emphasize I (contrast):

• Minä otan aina mukaan aineen, mutta sinä et.
  I always take the substance with me, but you don’t.

Why is the word order otan aina mukaan aineen? Could it also be otan aineen aina mukaan?

Both otan aina mukaan aineen and otan aineen aina mukaan are grammatically correct.

Finnish word order is relatively flexible; the choice mostly affects rhythm and emphasis.

• Otan aina mukaan aineen...
  – neutral, smooth: always modifies the action as a whole.

• Otan aineen aina mukaan...
  – slightly more focus on the substance, then you add that you always take it with you.

In everyday speech, the original order (otan aina mukaan aineen) sounds very natural. Changing the order is usually about nuance, not correctness.

What does ottaa mukaan literally mean? Could I just say otan aineen?

Ottaa mukaan is a fixed verb+adverb combination meaning to take along / to take with oneself.

• ottaa alone = to take (pick up, take possession)
• ottaa mukaan = to take along with you / bring along

So:

• Otan aineen. = I take the substance.
  (context decides whether you’re just picking it up or taking it somewhere)
• Otan aineen mukaan. = I take the substance with me / along (when I go).

In this sentence, the idea is clearly “take it with you”, so ottaa mukaan is the natural expression.

What form is aineen, and why not just aine?

The base form is aine (substance).

Aineen is the singular genitive / accusative form. Here it functions as a total object of the verb ottaa:

• otan aineen = I take the (whole, specific) substance

Finnish objects often use:

• Nominative (e.g. aine) for some cases (especially with certain tenses/moods),
• Genitive-looking form (aineen) as the total object,
• Partitive (ainetta) as a partial/indefinite object.

In this sentence, you’re taking one specific, whole thing, so the total object aineen is used.

Could you say otan aina mukaan ainetta instead? What difference would that make?

You can say otan aina mukaan ainetta, but it changes the meaning:

• otan aina mukaan aineen
  = I always take the (whole, specific) substance with me.

• otan aina mukaan ainetta
  = I always take some (of the) substance / some substance with me.
  (indefinite quantity, maybe a bit of it, or some kind or other)

Ainetta (partitive) suggests an indefinite amount or type, not a clearly defined individual item (like a bottle, a can, a spray).

For something like mosquito repellent, you usually think of a particular item, so aineen is the most natural.

What is joka, and why is it used instead of mikä?

Joka is a relative pronoun meaning that / which / who.
It refers back to a specific noun (aineen):

• aineen, joka karkottaa hyttysiä
  = the substance *that repels mosquitoes*

In Finnish:

• Use joka to refer back to a specific noun (aine, koira, talo, etc.).
• Use mikä mainly to refer back to:
  • whole sentences/ideas:
    Hän myöhästyi, mikä oli ikävää.
    He was late, which was unfortunate.
  • se in structures like se, mikä... / se, mitä...

So here, since we’re describing aine (a noun), joka is the correct choice.

Why is there a comma before joka: aineen, joka karkottaa hyttysiä?

In standard written Finnish, a relative clause introduced by “joka/mikä” is preceded by a comma:

• aineen, joka karkottaa hyttysiä
• kirjan, jonka ostin eilen
• talo, missä hän asuu

The comma marks the start of the clause that gives extra information about aineen (“which repels mosquitoes”).

In speech you obviously don’t say the comma, but in writing it’s required in these kinds of relative clauses.

Is karkottaa in the infinitive or present tense here? How does it work?

In the sentence, karkottaa is 3rd person singular present tense:

• (aine) karkottaa hyttysiä = (the substance) repels mosquitoes.

For verbs of this type, the dictionary (1st infinitive) form and the 3rd person singular present often look identical:

• infinitive: karkottaa = to repel, drive away
• 3rd person sg present: hän karkottaa = he/she/it repels

Other forms:

• minä karkotan – I repel
• sinä karkotat – you repel
• me karkotamme – we repel

So grammatically it’s a finite verb in a relative clause, even though it looks like the infinitive.

Why is it hyttysiä and not hyttyset? What case is that?

Hyttysiä is the plural partitive of hyttynen (mosquito):

• singular nominative: hyttynen
• plural nominative: hyttyset
• plural partitive: hyttysiä

Here it’s used as the object of karkottaa.

Using the partitive plural (hyttysiä) suggests:

• an indefinite number of mosquitoes,
• mosquitoes in general, not a particular, clearly delimited group.

So joka karkottaa hyttysiä is naturally understood as:

• “which repels mosquitoes (in general)”,
  not “which repels these particular mosquitoes, all of them”.

That generic, indefinite feel is exactly what you usually want here.

Could you instead say joka karkottaa hyttyset? Would that be wrong?

It wouldn’t be grammatically wrong, but it sounds different.

• joka karkottaa hyttysiä
  = repels mosquitoes (in general, an indefinite number)

• joka karkottaa hyttyset
  = repels the mosquitoes (a specific set, or all of them)

Hyttyset (nominative plural) as an object tends to suggest a more specific or total group. You might say it, for example, if you’re talking about:

• ne hyttyset järven rannalla – those mosquitoes by the lake
  and you want to say the substance repels all of them.

For general mosquito repellent, hyttysiä is much more natural.

Could the sentence use mukaani instead of mukaan? What’s the difference?

Yes, you could say:

• Siksi otan aina mukaani aineen, joka karkottaa hyttysiä.

Mukaan(i) is related to the postposition mukaan:

• mukaan = along, with
• mukaani = with me / along with me (mukaan + -ni “my”)

In otan mukaan aineen, mukaan behaves like an adverb (“along”).
In otan mukaani aineen, it’s more like “to my company / with me personally”.

Both are idiomatic:

• otan aineen mukaan – I take the substance along (with me, implied)
• otan aineen mukaani – I take the substance with me

In modern speech, mukaan is more common and feels a bit more neutral; mukaani can sound slightly more formal or stylistically marked, but it’s fully correct.