Learn Hardcore Finnish: Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla, mutta tänään järjestät keittiön. - You have a habit of studying Finnish in the evening, but today you are organizing the kitchen.

Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla, mutta tänään järjestät keittiön.

You have a habit of studying Finnish in the evening, but today you are organizing the kitchen.

Breakdown of Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla, mutta tänään järjestät keittiön.

Elon.io is an online learning platform

We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla, mutta tänään järjestät keittiön.

Why is it “Sinulla on” and not “Sinä olet”?

In Finnish, possession is usually expressed with a structure like:

Sinulla on X = You have X (literally: at you is X)

Here, Sinulla on tapana literally means “At you is (a) habit” → “You have a habit (of…)”.

Sinä olet means “You are”, which doesn’t fit the idea of “having a habit”.
- ✗ Sinä olet tapana is incorrect.

So Sinulla on tapana is the fixed, natural way to say “you usually / you have a habit of …”.

What exactly does “on tapana” mean, and why is it tapana and not tapa?

tapa = habit, way, manner
olla tapana (tehdä jotain) is an idiomatic expression meaning:
- to have a habit (of doing something)
- to usually do something

So Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea ≈ “You usually study Finnish / you have a habit of studying Finnish.”

tapana is the essive case of tapa:

tapa (nominative) → tapana (essive: “as a habit”)

Literally:

Sinulla on tapana opiskella...
At you is as a habit to study…

You almost always see olla tapana with tapana, not tapa.

Could I say this more simply without “on tapana”?

Yes. A very common alternative is to use yleensä (“usually”):

Yleensä opiskelet suomea illalla, mutta tänään järjestät keittiön.

This is closer to the English structure:

“You usually study Finnish in the evening, but today you’re organizing the kitchen.”

Difference in nuance:

Sinulla on tapana opiskella…
Slightly more about your habit / custom.
Yleensä opiskelet…
More about what usually happens.

Both are perfectly natural.

Why is it “opiskella” and not “opiskele”?

opiskella is the basic infinitive form: “to study”.

In olla tapana + infinitive, the verb must be in infinitive form:

Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea.
You have a habit of studying Finnish.

If you used opiskele, that’s an imperative or stem form, not correct here:

✗ Sinulla on tapana opiskele suomea. (wrong)

Another finite form would change the structure entirely:

Sinä opiskelet suomea illalla. = You study Finnish in the evening.

Why is it “suomea” and not “suomi”?

suomi is “Finnish (language)”, basic form.
suomea is the partitive case.

With verbs like opiskella (to study), puhua (to speak), etc., languages are usually in the partitive:

opiskella suomea = to study Finnish
puhua suomea = to speak Finnish
ymmärtää suomea = to understand (some) Finnish

Reasons:

Verbs of learning/knowing/speaking often take a partitive object in Finnish.
It suggests an open / ongoing / not-bounded amount of the language (you’re not studying “all of Finnish” as a completed object).

So:

Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla is the natural form.
✗ opiskella suomi is not correct here.

What does “illalla” mean exactly, and why not just “ilta”?

ilta = evening (basic form)
illalla = in the evening (adessive case, used for times like illalla, aamulla, yöllä).

So:

opiskella suomea illalla = to study Finnish in the evening

You cannot just use ilta here:

✗ opiskella suomea ilta (wrong)

Some useful comparisons:

illalla = in the (a/the) evening
iltaisin = in the evenings / on evenings (habitually, plural-ish idea)

In this sentence, illalla already works well with the idea of a usual time; you could also say:

Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea iltaisin.
Slightly more explicitly “in the evenings (generally)”.

Why is there no “sinä” before “järjestät”?

Finnish normally omits subject pronouns when they are clear from the verb ending.

järjestät has the ending -t, which marks 2nd person singular (“you”).
So you is already encoded in the verb, and sinä is not needed.

You could say:

Sinä järjestät keittiön.
This is grammatical, but in neutral speech it sounds emphatic:
- “YOU are organizing the kitchen (not someone else).”

Here, the neutral version (no sinä) is more natural:

…mutta tänään järjestät keittiön.

What does “järjestät” mean, and how is it different from “siivoat”?

järjestää = to arrange, organize, put in order
- järjestät keittiön = you organize / put the kitchen in order (e.g. rearrange, tidy, put things where they belong)
siivota = to clean
- siivoat keittiön = you clean the kitchen (wipe surfaces, wash, vacuum, etc.)

In everyday talk:

järjestää keittiön → emphasizes arranging/organizing
siivota keittiön → emphasizes cleaning

Both can overlap in meaning (“tidying the kitchen”), but they’re not identical.

Why is it “keittiön” and not “keittiö” or “keittiötä”?

keittiö = kitchen (nominative, basic form)
keittiön = genitive form, used here as a total object (accusative):
- järjestät keittiön = you will organize the whole kitchen (as a complete task)
keittiötä = partitive form:
- järjestät keittiötä = you are organizing (some of) the kitchen / you’re in the middle of the process, not necessarily finishing the whole thing.

In this sentence, keittiön suggests a complete, goal-oriented action:
“Today you (will) organize the kitchen (fully).”

You cannot use bare keittiö as the object:

✗ järjestät keittiö (wrong)

How would the sentence change if I want to say I’m just working on the kitchen, not finishing it?

Then you’d typically use the partitive object:

Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla, mutta tänään järjestät keittiötä.

Nuance:

järjestät keittiön → focusing on completing the organizing of the kitchen.
järjestät keittiötä → focusing on the ongoing activity, not whether you finish.

English often doesn’t mark this difference so clearly.

Why does “järjestät” (present tense) translate as “are organizing / will organize” today?

Finnish uses the present tense (called preesens) for:

Actions happening right now:
- Järjestät keittiön. = You are organizing the kitchen (now).
Near-future plans:
- Tänään järjestät keittiön. = Today you’ll organize the kitchen / you are going to organize the kitchen.

There is no separate “will” future form; context and time words (tänään) show that this is about today / the near future.

How would I ask: “Do you usually study Finnish in the evening?” using this structure?

Use olla in question form onko:

Onko sinulla tapana opiskella suomea illalla?

Breakdown:

Onko = is / do you have (question form of “on”)
sinulla = at you
tapana = as a habit
opiskella suomea illalla = to study Finnish in the evening

Literally: “Is it a habit for you to study Finnish in the evening?”

Not:

✗ Oletko sinulla tapana… (wrong)
✗ Oletko tapana opiskella… (wrong)

How do I say “You don’t usually study Finnish in the evening”?

Negate olla in the Sinulla on tapana part:

Sinulla ei ole tapana opiskella suomea illalla.

Breakdown:

Sinulla = at you
ei ole = is not / do not have
tapana = as a habit
opiskella suomea illalla = to study Finnish in the evening

Literally: “At you there is not as a habit to study Finnish in the evening.”

Can I change the word order to emphasize today?

Yes. Word order is flexible and used to show emphasis.

Original:

Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla, mutta tänään järjestät keittiön.

Emphasizing today:

Tänään järjestät keittiön, mutta sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla.
- Today you’re organizing the kitchen, but (otherwise) you usually study Finnish in the evening.

Both are grammatical; you just shift what you want to highlight.

Why is it “mutta” and not “vaan”? What’s the difference?

Both can translate as “but”, but they’re used differently.

mutta = but, however
Used for general contrast, with or without negation.
- Sinulla on tapana opiskella suomea illalla, mutta tänään järjestät keittiön.
vaan = but (rather)
Typically used after a negation, to correct or replace what was said:
- En opiskele suomea tänään, vaan järjestän keittiön.
  I’m not studying Finnish today, but (rather) I’m organizing the kitchen.

Because the first clause in your sentence is not negative, mutta is the natural choice.