Learn Hardcore Finnish: Tämä toimiala on kilpailtu, joten vain pätevä hakija saa paikan. - This sector is competitive, so only a competent applicant gets the position.

Toimiala literally comes from toimi (activity, function, operation) + ala (area, field), so it means an area of activity → in practice: industry, sector, line of business.

toimiala = an economic/occupational sector:
- IT-toimiala = the IT sector
- ravintola-ala / ravintola-toimiala = the restaurant industry
ala alone is more general: field, area, line:
- Tämä ala on vaikea. = This field (of work/study) is difficult.
- Opiskelen taidealaa. = I study art (as a field).

You could say Tämä ala on kilpailtu too, but tämä toimiala sounds more like talking about a recognized sector of the economy, e.g. the consulting industry rather than just this line of work in a vague way.

Why is it “on kilpailtu” and not something like “on kilpailullinen” for “is competitive”?

Kilpailtu is the passive past participle of kilpailla (to compete). Used as an adjective, it literally means something like “(much-)competed” or “contested”. Idiomatically it often means:

“there is a lot of competition for it”
“many people are competing for it”

So Tämä toimiala on kilpailtu implies “This industry is very sought after / there is fierce competition in this industry.”

You could say:

Tämä toimiala on kilpailullinen.

That would be understood, but kilpailullinen is more like “having a competitive nature/structure” (often used more in economics or abstract theory). In everyday speech, kilpailtu is much more natural for talking about a job market or industry people are fighting to get into.

What is “kilpailtu” grammatically? Why does it end in -tu?

Kilpailtu is:

the passive past participle of the verb kilpailla (to compete).

Pattern:

kilpailla → kilpailtu
kirjoittaa (to write) → kirjoitettu (written)
syödä (to eat) → syöty (eaten)

In this sentence, the participle is used adjectivally:

toimiala on kilpailtu
= “the industry is (highly) competed over / competitive”

So although English uses the adjective competitive, Finnish is using a participle that literally suggests “people have competed for it”.

How does joten work here? Is it the same as “so” or “therefore”? Could I use something else?

Joten is a coordinating conjunction meaning “so, therefore, and so”. It introduces a result or conclusion:

Tämä toimiala on kilpailtu, joten vain pätevä hakija saa paikan.
= This industry is competitive, so only a qualified applicant will get the position.

You can usually replace joten with:

siksi (for that reason, therefore)
- Tämä toimiala on kilpailtu, siksi vain pätevä hakija saa paikan.
sen takia / sen vuoksi (because of that, therefore)
- Slightly more formal or explanatory.

Word order:

joten normally appears at the start of the result clause, just like English “so”.
You cannot move joten around freely the way you sometimes can in English. It basically always comes first in its clause.

What does vain do here, and how does its position affect the meaning?

Vain means “only, just”.

In vain pätevä hakija saa paikan, the scope of vain is pätevä hakija:

vain pätevä hakija saa paikan
→ only a qualified applicant (nobody else) will get the position.

If you move vain, the meaning changes:

pätevä hakija saa vain paikan
→ “A qualified applicant gets only the position (and nothing more).”

So word order plus vain is crucial:

Put vain just before the thing that is restricted or limited:
- vain hän = only he/she
- vain tänään = only today
- vain paikan = only the position

Why is it pätevä hakija (both in basic form) and not something like pätevän hakijan?

Here pätevä hakija is the subject of the second clause:

vain pätevä hakija = only a qualified applicant
saa paikan = will get the position

In Finnish, the default form for the subject is nominative:

pätevä (adj., nominative singular)
hakija (noun, nominative singular)

Pätevän hakijan would be genitive and used in other roles, e.g.:

Pätevän hakijan ansiosta saimme paikan täytettyä.
= Thanks to the qualified applicant, we got the position filled.

But as a plain subject in this sentence, pätevä hakija (both nominative) is correct and expected.

How does pätevä hakija manage to mean “a qualified applicant” in a general sense, when Finnish has no articles?

Finnish has no a/an/the, so pätevä hakija can mean:

a qualified applicant (one unspecified person)
or the qualified applicant (if context points to a specific one)
and it can also be generic, like “anyone who is a qualified applicant”.

In this sentence:

vain pätevä hakija saa paikan
is best read as generic: “only someone who is a qualified applicant will get the position”.

Finnish often uses a singular noun in nominative to express a general rule:

Hyvä opiskelija tekee läksynsä.
= A good student does their homework.
Terve ihminen nukkuu tarpeeksi.
= A healthy person sleeps enough.

Same pattern here. Context tells us it’s about any applicant, not a specific individual.

Why is it saa paikan and not something like ottaa paikan or saavuttaa paikan?

Saada means “to get, receive, obtain”, which fits the idea that someone gives you the job (the employer chooses you).

saa paikan = “gets the position/spot”.

Alternatives:

ottaa paikan = “takes the place” → implies the subject is actively taking it themselves, which sounds wrong for job selection.
saavuttaa paikan = “achieves/attains the place” → can sound more like winning a place in a competition, a result in rankings, etc.

In job or study contexts, saada paikan is very standard:

Hän sai paikan yliopistosta. = He/She got a place at the university.
Sain paikan kesätyöntekijänä. = I got a position as a summer worker.

Why is it paikan and not paikkaa? What case is paikan?

Paikan is the genitive/accusative singular of paikka (place, position).

Finnish objects use different cases depending on whether the action is seen as complete/total or ongoing/partial:

Total object (completed, one whole thing)
→ in this person/tense: genitive form (paikan).
Partial object (ongoing, uncompleted, “some of it”)
→ partitive (paikkaa).

Here:

saa paikan
= gets the (whole) position → the job is fully obtained → total object, so paikan.

If we were emphasizing a non-complete or “some” meaning, we might use partitive, but with saada + a clear, single endpoint (“to get the job”), the genitive-accusative is normal.

What exactly does paikka mean here? Is it literally “place” or “job”?

Paikka literally means place, spot, position.

In job or study contexts, paikka is often used in the sense of:

a position / a place on a program or team / a job.

Examples:

Sain paikan firmassa X. = I got a position at company X.
Hän haki paikkaa opettajana. = He/She applied for a position as a teacher.
En saanut paikkaa yliopistossa. = I didn’t get a place at the university.

So saa paikan in this sentence is naturally translated as “will get the position / job”.

Could you also say “Tämä toimiala on kilpailtu toimiala” or “kilpailtu toimiala”? How does that differ from “toimiala on kilpailtu”?

Yes, grammatically you can say kilpailtu toimiala (= a competitive industry):

Tämä on kilpailtu toimiala.
= This is a competitive industry.

Difference in nuance:

Tämä toimiala on kilpailtu.
- Focus on describing the current state of this particular industry.
- Literally: This industry is competitive/contested.
Tämä on kilpailtu toimiala.
- More like a classification: “This is a type of industry that is competitive.”
- Feels a bit more like a label or category.

Both are fine, but the original sentence with toimiala on kilpailtu sounds very natural when you’re first mentioning that specific industry and describing it.

Does saa here mean present or future (“gets” vs “will get”)? How is future expressed?

Finnish doesn’t have a separate future tense. The present tense often covers both:

saa = he/she gets / will get, depending on context.

So:

vain pätevä hakija saa paikan
can be translated as:
- “only a qualified applicant gets the position” (statement of a general rule), or
- “only a qualified applicant will get the position” (future outcome).

English needs to choose between present and future; Finnish just uses the present and context decides. Here, because we’re talking about the outcome of an application, “will get” is the most natural translation.