Log inSign up

Tänään pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön.

Tänään pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön.
Today I dress in a blue skirt and a black belt.

Breakdown of Tänään pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön.

ja
and
tänään
today
sininen
blue
musta
black
pukeutua
to get dressed
hame
the skirt
vyö
the belt
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Tänään pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön.

Where is the word “I” in this sentence, and why does pukeudun end in -n?

Finnish usually leaves out subject pronouns when the verb ending already shows the person.

  • pukeutua = to dress (oneself), to get dressed
  • pukeudun = I dress / I get dressed

The personal endings in the present tense are:

  • pukeudun = I get dressed (1st person singular, -n)
  • pukeudut = you get dressed (2nd person singular, -t)
  • pukeutuu = he/she gets dressed (3rd person singular)
  • pukeudumme = we get dressed
  • pukeudutte = you (plural) get dressed
  • pukeutuvat = they get dressed

So pukeudun already contains the meaning “I”, and adding minä is usually unnecessary (Minä pukeudun… is possible, but emphasizes I).

Why is the verb pukeudun used here instead of pukea or laittaa päälle?

Finnish has several “dress/put on” verbs with different patterns:

  • pukeutua johonkin = to dress (oneself) in something
    • uses the illative case (ending meaning into, in): pukeudun siniseen hameeseen
  • pukea jonkun / pukea jotain päälle = to dress someone / to put on something
    • Puen hameen päälleni. = I put the skirt on (myself).
  • laittaa päälle = to put on (clothes)
    • Laitan hameen päälleni.

In your sentence:

  • Tänään pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön.
    = Today I dress (myself) in a blue skirt and a black belt.

Here the focus is on what kind of outfit you are choosing/wearing for today, so pukeutua + illative is natural.

What case are siniseen hameeseen and mustaan vyöhön, and why are they in that case?

Both siniseen hameeseen and mustaan vyöhön are in the illative case.

  • Illative = “into / in / to (inside something)”
  • It answers “mihin?” = into what? to where?

The verb pukeutua always takes its clothing in the illative case:

  • pukeutua mustaan pukuun = to dress in a black suit
  • pukeutua farkkuihin = to dress in jeans

So:

  • hame → hameeseen (illative)
  • vyö → vyöhön (illative)
  • sininen → siniseen (illative, to match hameeseen)
  • musta → mustaan (illative, to match vyöhön)

The illative ending here replaces the English preposition “in/into” after pukeutua.

How exactly does hame become hameeseen?

hame is a two-syllable word ending in a vowel. For many such words, the illative is formed by:

  1. Adding an extra -e-
  2. Then adding -seen to the end

So:

  • hame
  • stem: hame
  • add -e-
    • -seen → hameeseen

Other similar examples:

  • huone → huoneeseen (into the room)
  • kirje → kirjeeseen (into the letter)

So hameeseen literally means into the skirt / in the skirt.

How does vyö turn into vyöhön, and what is that h doing there?

vyö has a bit different illative formation. For many one-syllable words ending in a vowel, Finnish adds -hVn (h + a vowel + n), and the vowel matches the word’s vowel harmony:

  • pattern: vyö → vyö + hön → vyöhön

The h is just part of a common illative ending pattern; it doesn’t have a meaning by itself.

Other examples of this type:

  • työ → työhön (to work)
  • yö → yöhön (into the night)
  • kuu → kuuhun (to the moon)
  • maa → maahan (to the ground, to the country)

So vyöhön = into / in the belt in the grammatical sense needed after pukeutua.

Why do sininen and musta change to siniseen and mustaan? Why don’t they stay in the basic form?

In Finnish, adjectives must agree with the nouns they modify in:

  • case (nominative, illative, etc.)
  • number (singular/plural)

The nouns are:

  • hameeseen (illative singular)
  • vyöhön (illative singular)

So the adjectives must also be in illative singular:

  • sininen (blue) → siniseen (illative singular)
  • musta (black) → mustaan (illative singular)

Pattern examples:

  • nominative: sininen hame → illative: siniseen hameeseen
  • nominative: musta vyö → illative: mustaan vyöhön

This kind of adjective–noun agreement is always required in standard Finnish.

Could I say “pukeudun sininen hame ja musta vyö” without those case endings?

No. That would be ungrammatical in Finnish.

Finnish does not use prepositions like English in, into here; instead, it relies on case endings on the nouns (and their adjectives). After pukeutua, the clothing items must be in the illative case:

  • ❌ pukeudun sininen hame
  • ✅ pukeudun siniseen hameeseen

Similarly for the belt:

  • ❌ musta vyö (in this context)
  • ✅ mustaan vyöhön

So the case endings are not optional decoration; they are essential grammar.

Is Tänään (today) required, and can it appear somewhere else in the sentence?

Tänään is not grammatically required; it just adds the time information.

Common word orders:

  • Tänään pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön.
    (Neutral: emphasizing today a bit; time often comes first.)
  • Pukeudun tänään siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön.
    (Very natural, stressing the action pukeudun slightly more.)
  • Pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön tänään.
    (Also possible; tends to put more emphasis on today at the end.)

Word order is relatively flexible, but beginners are usually safest with:

  • time → verb → rest: Tänään pukeudun …
  • or verb → time → rest: Pukeudun tänään …
Why isn’t there a separate Finnish word for “in” or “into” like in English?

Finnish usually expresses ideas like in, into, to with case endings, not free-standing prepositions.

Here:

  • siniseen hameeseen
  • mustaan vyöhön

contain the meaning of:

  • “into a blue skirt / in a blue skirt”
  • “into a black belt / in a black belt”

The illative endings -een / -hön play the role of in/into.

So instead of:

  • English: dress in a blue skirt
  • Finnish: pukeutua siniseen hameeseen (no separate word for in)
Does pukeudun mean “I am wearing” or “I am getting dressed”? What is the nuance with Tänään pukeudun…?

Literally, pukeudun means “I get dressed / I am dressing myself”, an action, not a state.

However, in context, Tänään pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön is often used to talk about your outfit choice for today, and can be understood like:

  • “Today I’m (going to) dress in a blue skirt and a black belt.”

If you simply want to say “I am wearing a blue skirt and a black belt (today)”, a more typical Finnish sentence would be:

  • Minulla on tänään sininen hame ja musta vyö (päällä).
    literally: “I have today a blue skirt and a black belt (on).”

So:

  • pukeudun → focuses on the act or choice of dressing
  • Minulla on … päällä → describes what you are currently wearing
Could I say “Tänään puen sinisen hameen ja mustan vyön” instead? What is the difference?

Yes, you can. The meanings are close but not identical.

  • Tänään pukeudun siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön.

    • uses pukeutua
      • illative
    • emphasizes dressing yourself in that kind of outfit (blue skirt + black belt)
    • “Today I dress in / I’m dressing in a blue skirt and a black belt.”

  • Tänään puen sinisen hameen ja mustan vyön.

    • uses pukea
      • direct object (accusative-like): hameen, vyön
    • emphasizes putting those items on
    • more like “Today I (will) put on a blue skirt and a black belt.”

Both are correct; pukeutua sounds a bit more like you are describing your outfit choice as a whole.

Why is there no comma before ja in “siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön”?

In Finnish, a comma is not used between just two items joined by ja (and) in a simple list:

  • siniseen hameeseen ja mustaan vyöhön
  • taloon ja puutarhaan
  • äitini ja isäni

A comma would be used in longer lists:

  • siniseen hameeseen, mustaan vyöhön ja valkoiseen puseroon
    (three items → comma between the first two, none before ja)