Muuten en jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.

Otherwise I wouldn’t have the energy to work so much on weekdays.

Breakdown of Muuten en jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.

• paljon: much
• työskennellä: to work
• ei: not
• jaksaa: to have the energy
• muuten: otherwise
• niin: so
• arkipäivinä: on weekdays

Questions & Answers about Muuten en jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.

What exactly does muuten mean here, and does it always come at the beginning?

In this sentence muuten means otherwise / or else. It refers back to some condition or situation mentioned earlier:

• If I didn’t X, *otherwise I wouldn’t have the energy to work so much on weekdays.*

Common meanings of muuten are:

• otherwise, or else (as here)
• in other respects
• by the way (in conversation)

Position:

• Very often it comes first: Muuten en jaksaisi…
• It can also come after the subject or negative verb for slightly different emphasis:
  
  • En muuten jaksaisi työskennellä… – “I really wouldn’t have the energy to work…” (focus on the verb / attitude)

Grammatically, putting muuten first is the neutral, default pattern in a sentence like this.

Why is it en jaksaisi (conditional) and not en jaksa (present tense)?

En jaksaisi is the conditional mood, which expresses something hypothetical, imagined, or dependent on a condition.

• En jaksa työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.
  = “I don’t have the energy to work that much on weekdays.” (a simple statement of fact)

• En jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.
  = “I wouldn’t have the energy to work that much on weekdays.”
  (implied: if something were different / if X didn’t happen)

Because the sentence starts with muuten (otherwise), there is an implied condition (usually mentioned in the previous sentence). Together with that, the conditional mood makes perfect sense:

• I need to drink coffee. Otherwise I *wouldn’t have the energy to work so much on weekdays.
  → *Muuten en jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.

How is en jaksaisi formed grammatically? Why does the main verb still look like a conditional form even with negation?

En jaksaisi combines:

• en – the negative verb, 1st person singular
• jaksaisi – main verb jaksaa in the conditional (3rd person‑like conditional form; conditional stem + -isi)

In Finnish:

• For present tense negation: en jaksa
  
  • main verb in connegative form (jaksa)
• For conditional negation: en jaksaisi
  
  • main verb stays in the conditional form (jaksaisi)

So you do not change jaksaisi into some special “negative conditional” form; you just add the correct negative verb (en, et, ei, emme, ette, eivät) in front:

• En jaksaisi – I wouldn’t have the energy
• Et jaksaisi – You wouldn’t have the energy
• Emme jaksaisi – We wouldn’t have the energy

What is the nuance of jaksaa in this sentence? Could I just translate it as “can”?

Jaksaa literally means “to have the strength/energy (for something)”, both physically and mentally.

In many contexts, English can works as a translation, but jaksaa is more about energy, endurance, or motivation than pure ability.

Nuances:

• En jaksa. – “I’m too tired / I don’t have the energy (to do it).”
• En jaksa työskennellä niin paljon. – “I can’t keep up that much work / I don’t have the stamina to work that much.”

Compare with:

• voida – “to be able, to be allowed”
• pystyä – “to be capable of (managing something)”
• ehtiä – “to have time (to do something)”

Here en jaksaisi focuses on not having the energy / stamina, not on permission, physical ability in general, or time.

Why is työskennellä in the infinitive form here? Could it be something like työskentelen?

After jaksaa, the verb that describes what you have (or don’t have) energy to do is normally in the first infinitive (the dictionary form):

• jaksan nukkua – I can manage to sleep
• en jaksa lukea – I don’t have the energy to read
• en jaksaisi työskennellä – I wouldn’t have the energy to work

So työskennellä is the correct infinitive complement of jaksaa.

You cannot say en jaksaisi työskentelen – that mixes finite forms incorrectly. Only one main verb in the clause gets a finite personal form (jaksaisin/jaksaisi etc.); the following verb appears as an infinitive (työskennellä).

What is the difference between työskennellä and tehdä töitä?

Both refer to “working”, but there are slight nuances:

• työskennellä

  • roughly: “to be working, to do work”
  • often used for general, ongoing work:
    
    • Hän työskentelee lääkärinä. – He/She works as a doctor.
    • Työskentelen kotona. – I work from home.

• tehdä töitä

  • literally: “to do work (tasks)”
  • can sound slightly more concrete or task‑oriented:
    
    • Teen töitä iltaisin. – I work / do (my) work in the evenings.

In this sentence, you could also say:

• Muuten en jaksaisi tehdä niin paljon töitä arkipäivinä.

Both are natural. Työskennellä is a bit more neutral/formal; tehdä töitä is very common in everyday speech.

What does the phrase niin paljon do here? Why not just paljon?

• paljon by itself means “a lot / much / many”.
• niin paljon means “so much” or “that much” – it adds a degree of emphasis.

In this sentence:

• työskennellä paljon – “to work a lot” (neutral)
• työskennellä niin paljon – “to work so much / that much” (emphasising how large the amount is)

Compare:

• En syö paljon. – I don’t eat much.
• En syö niin paljon. – I don’t eat that much / so much (as you think / as before / as someone else).

The word order is fixed: degree adverb niin comes before paljon.

What case is arkipäivinä, and why is that used to mean “on weekdays”?

Arkipäivinä is the plural essive of arkipäivä (“weekday”):

• singular nominative: arkipäivä
• plural nominative: arkipäivät
• plural essive: arkipäivinä

The essive case (ending ‑na / ‑nä) often expresses a state, role, or time period. In the plural, it is very commonly used for expressions like “on [these days / in these periods]”:

• kesäisin / kesäpäivinä – in summer / on summer days
• viikonloppuisin / viikonloppuina – on weekends
• arkipäivinä – on weekdays

So arkipäivinä here means “during weekdays / on weekdays” in general.

Why is arkipäivinä plural? Could I use the singular instead?

When talking about something that regularly happens on multiple days (all weekdays in general), Finnish normally uses the plural:

• arkipäivinä – on weekdays (in general)
• viikonloppuina – on weekends
• iltoina – in the evenings

Using the singular arkipäivänä would usually refer to one specific weekday:

• Tulin kotiin myöhään eräänä arkipäivänä. – I came home late on one weekday.

In your sentence, you mean a habitual pattern across many weekdays, so arkipäivinä (plural essive) is the natural choice.

Could the word order be different, for example En muuten jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä? Does that change the meaning?

Yes, you can change the position of muuten without changing the basic meaning, but the focus shifts slightly.

1. Muuten en jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.

   • Neutral: “Otherwise I wouldn’t have the energy to work so much on weekdays.”
   • Muuten sets up the condition (“in any other case / if not for X”).

2. En muuten jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.

   • More like: “I really wouldn’t have the energy to work so much on weekdays (you know).”
   • Here muuten behaves a bit like a sentence adverb, adding nuance or attitude.

3. En jaksaisi työskennellä muuten niin paljon arkipäivinä.

   • Possible but less common; muuten then strongly modifies työskennellä (“not work that much otherwise / in any other way”).

The original word order is the clearest and most neutral for the otherwise → consequence structure.

Why is there no minä in the sentence? How do we know it means “I”?

Finnish is a pro‑drop language: subject pronouns (minä, sinä, hän, me, te, he) are often omitted because the verb form already shows the person and number.

• en jaksaisi
  
  • en = 1st person singular form of the negative verb
  • so the subject must be “I”.

If you included minä, it would be grammatical but more emphatic:

• Minä en jaksaisi työskennellä niin paljon arkipäivinä.
  – “I wouldn’t have the energy to work so much on weekdays.” (with emphasis on I, as opposed to someone else)

In neutral statements, leaving minä out is completely normal and very common.