Learn Hardcore Finnish: Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni, mutta kollega muistuttaa, että ura kehittyy hitaasti. - I am sometimes disappointed in myself, but a colleague reminds me that a career develops slowly.

The basic forms are: pettyä – petyn – pettyi – pettynyt.
In Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni, the structure is olla + -nut/-nyt participle, which in Finnish often corresponds to the perfect tense or a resulting state.

So Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni literally is closer to “I have sometimes become disappointed in myself”, but in natural English you’d often say “I have sometimes been disappointed in myself.”

Pettynyt also behaves like an adjective:

pettynyt ihminen = a disappointed person

Why is it Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni and not something like Petyn joskus itseeni?

Both are grammatical, but they don’t mean quite the same thing.

Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni
– Focus on past occasions where you have (at some point) become disappointed in yourself.
– Very naturally translated as “I have sometimes been disappointed in myself.”
Petyn joskus itseeni
– Simple present (or “future”) meaning “I (sometimes) get disappointed in myself / will get disappointed in myself.”
– Describes a repeating or habitual reaction in a more direct, “event-like” way.

So the original sentence emphasizes that on certain occasions in your life so far, you have been disappointed in yourself.

What case is itseeni, and why is that case used here?

Itseeni is in the illative case (the “into” case) with a possessive suffix.

Base form: itse (“self”)
Illative ending: -en (for this word)
1st person singular possessive: -ni (“my”)
Together: itse + en + ni → itseeni = “into myself / in myself”

The verb pettyä (“to become disappointed”) typically takes its object in the illative:

Olen pettynyt itseeni. = I’m disappointed in myself.
Olen pettynyt sinuun. = I’m disappointed in you.
Olen pettynyt elokuvaan. = I’m disappointed in the movie.

So itseeni is used because Finnish says literally “to become disappointed into someone/something.”

Why do we use itseeni (“myself”) instead of minuun (“into me”)?

Finnish uses the reflexive pronoun itse plus a possessive suffix to express “myself / yourself / himself…” in this kind of meaning.

minuun just means “into me” (physically or metaphorically) and is not the standard way to say “in myself” in the sense of being disappointed in oneself.
itseeni = “(into) myself” in the reflexive sense: I as the same person as the subject.

Compare:

Olen pettynyt itseeni. = I’m disappointed in myself.
Olen pettynyt sinuun. = I’m disappointed in you (a different person).
Hän on pettynyt itseensä. = He/She is disappointed in him-/herself.

So the reflexive itse- is needed to show that the subject and the “target” are the same person.

What does the -ni at the end of itseeni mean?

The -ni is a possessive suffix meaning “my”.

In Finnish, possessive suffixes attach directly to the noun (after case endings):

talo = house
taloon = into the house
talooni = into my house

Similarly:

itse = self
itse-en (illative) → itseeni = into myself (literally “my self into”)

Other persons work the same way:

itseesi = into yourself (sg)
itseensä = into himself/herself/themselves
itseemme = into ourselves
itseenne = into yourselves

So itseeni literally encodes both reflexivity (itse-) and person (-ni = my).

Could I say Olen joskus ollut pettynyt itseeni? How does that differ from Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni?

You can say Olen joskus ollut pettynyt itseeni, and it is grammatical, but there is a nuance:

Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni.
– Standard way to express the idea.
– Means “On some occasions, I have become (and been) disappointed in myself.”
Olen joskus ollut pettynyt itseeni.
– Adds an extra layer of “having been in that state.”
– Can make the disappointment sound more like a longer-lasting state you were in at certain times, rather than just the moment of becoming disappointed.

In everyday speech, most Finns would normally just say Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni for this meaning.

Why is there no word for “me” after muistuttaa? Could it be kollega muistuttaa minua?

Yes, you can say kollega muistuttaa minua, and that would be perfectly correct:

kollega muistuttaa minua, että…
even more explicitly: kollega muistuttaa minua siitä, että…

In the original, kollega muistuttaa, että…, the object (“me”) is simply left out because it is obvious from context that the colleague is reminding me. This kind of omission is very common in Finnish, especially with pronouns that are clear from the situation.

So:

kollega muistuttaa, että ura kehittyy hitaasti.
= “a colleague reminds (me) that a career develops slowly.”

The me is understood but not stated.

Why is it mutta and not vaan?

Finnish has two main words that often translate as “but”:

mutta = but, however (general contrast)
vaan = but rather, but instead (used mainly after a negation)

You use vaan when you correct or replace something said in a negative sentence:

En ole surullinen, vaan pettynyt.
= I’m not sad, but (rather) disappointed.

In the example, there is no preceding negation. We are just contrasting two facts:

I have sometimes been disappointed in myself, but a colleague reminds me…

So mutta is the correct conjunction here.

Why is there no pronoun like hän before kollega? Is kollega alone normal?

Yes, that is completely normal in Finnish.

Kollega is a noun meaning “colleague”.
Finnish does not require personal pronouns as subjects the way English often does. The verb ending already shows the person and number when needed.

Here, the subject is the noun kollega, so a separate pronoun hän (“he/she”) would be unnecessary and ungrammatical:

✅ mutta kollega muistuttaa, että…
❌ mutta hän kollega muistuttaa, että…

If you want to say my colleague, you would usually say:

mutta kollegani muistuttaa, että… = but my colleague reminds (me) that…

Does kollega here mean “a colleague” or “my colleague”? How do you know?

Without any possessive suffix or other context, kollega is neutral:

It most naturally corresponds to “a colleague” or sometimes “a/the colleague” (if context has already established which one).
To say explicitly “my colleague”, Finnish usually adds a possessive suffix: kollegani.

So:

kollega muistuttaa, että…
= a colleague reminds (me) that…
kollegani muistuttaa, että…
= my colleague reminds (me) that…

In real texts or speech, context will tell you whether it’s a specific known colleague or just “some colleague.”

Why is there a comma before että? In English we wouldn’t usually put a comma before “that”.

In Finnish punctuation, a comma is required before most subordinate clauses, including those introduced by että.

So:

kollega muistuttaa, että ura kehittyy hitaasti.

In English, you would often write:

“A colleague reminds me that a career develops slowly.” (no comma)

But in Finnish the rule is different: you must write the comma before että when it starts a subordinate clause.

What is the function of että here? Is it like English “that”?

Yes, että here is a subordinating conjunction, very similar to English “that” in reported speech:

kollega muistuttaa, että ura kehittyy hitaasti.
= “a colleague reminds (me) that a career develops slowly.”

Key points:

You cannot normally drop että the way English often drops “that”.
– English: “He said (that) he is tired.”
– Finnish: Hän sanoi, että on väsynyt. (you must keep että)
Että introduces the content of what is reminded/said/thought, etc.

Why is ura in the nominative and not in the partitive (like uraa)?

Ura is the subject of the verb kehittyy, so it appears in the nominative singular:

ura kehittyy hitaasti = the career develops slowly.

In this sentence:

kehittyä (“to develop”) is intransitive (no direct object).
The thing that develops is the subject, and ordinary subjects take nominative case.

Partitive subjects do exist in Finnish, but they appear in certain specific constructions (e.g. existential sentences: Pöydällä on kirjoja.). This is not such a structure, so ura is nominative, not partitive.

Why is kehittyy in the present tense even though we are talking about something that happens over a long time (like the future)?

Finnish uses the present tense for several meanings:

Current ongoing actions or states
General truths and tendencies
Future events, when context makes it clear

Here, ura kehittyy hitaasti expresses a general truth / tendency: careers in general (or this career) develop slowly. Even if you’re thinking mostly about the future, Finnish still uses the present.

So:

ura kehittyy hitaasti
= a career develops slowly / a career will develop slowly (depending on context)

There is no special “future tense” in Finnish.

Can joskus be placed in a different position? How would moving it change the nuance?

Yes, joskus (“sometimes”) is quite flexible in word order. All of these are grammatical:

Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni.
Joskus olen pettynyt itseeni.

The difference is in emphasis:

Olen joskus pettynyt itseeni.
– Very neutral, typical order.
– Focus is mainly on the idea of being disappointed in yourself, with joskus as an added detail.
Joskus olen pettynyt itseeni.
– By putting joskus first, you emphasize “sometimes”:
“Sometimes, I’m disappointed in myself.”

Other positions, like Olen pettynyt joskus itseeni, are possible but sound less natural or may slightly confuse the grouping of words. The two versions above are the most natural.

Could I change the word order in ura kehittyy hitaasti, for example to Hitaasti ura kehittyy? Is that still correct?

Yes, different word orders are possible, but they change the emphasis and style:

Ura kehittyy hitaasti.
– Neutral, most common.
– Simply states: “The career develops slowly.”
Hitaasti ura kehittyy.
– More emphatic / stylistic, often found in speech with emotional emphasis or in written, slightly poetic style.
– Roughly: “Slowly the career develops,” strongly highlighting hitaasti.
Ura hitaasti kehittyy.
– Possible but quite marked; usually sounds poetic or strongly emphasized.

In everyday neutral language, Ura kehittyy hitaasti is the default, and the original sentence uses exactly that.