Learn Hardcore Finnish: Kaverini seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti ja lukee uutisia joka aamu. - My friend closely follows politics and reads the news every morning.

With a possessive suffix: kaverini
With a possessive pronoun + noun (often together with the suffix, but not always in speech):
- minun kaverini = my friend (more explicit, slightly more emphatic)
- In everyday spoken Finnish, people often drop minun and just say mun kaveri.

So kaverini alone is enough to mean “my friend”.

Can kaverini also mean “my friends”?

Yes, kaverini is ambiguous in written standard Finnish:

kaverini can mean my friend (singular)
kaverini can also mean my friends (plural)

Which one it is depends on context. In speech, people would usually make the number clear:

singular: mun kaveri
plural: mun kaverit

In this sentence, Kaverini seuraa politiikkaa…, the verb is seuraa (3rd person singular), so we interpret kaverini as “my friend (singular) follows politics…”.
If it were plural, standard Finnish would prefer Kaverini seuraavat politiikkaa (my friends follow politics), with seuraavat (3rd person plural).

What’s the difference between kaveri and ystävä for “friend”?

Both relate to “friend”, but the nuance is different:

kaveri
- more casual: buddy, mate, pal
- can be quite broad: schoolmate, teammate, colleague you get along with
- very common in everyday speech
ystävä
- closer to “true friend”, “close friend”
- sounds a little more serious or formal
- good for talking about emotionally close friendships

In this sentence, Kaverini seuraa politiikkaa…, kaverini suggests an ordinary friend or buddy of yours, not necessarily your best or closest friend.

Why is it politiikkaa (with -a) and not just politiikka?

Politiikkaa is the partitive case of politiikka (politics).

The verb seurata (to follow, to track) typically takes its object in the partitive when you mean following something continuously / as an ongoing activity, not as a completed, one-off action.

seurata politiikkaa = to follow politics (as a general, ongoing interest)
seurata peliä = to watch/follow a game (while it’s happening)

Formally:

politiikka (nominative) → politiikkaa (partitive singular)

Reasons for the partitive here:

Abstract/unbounded thing: “politics” is not a countable object that can be “completed” or “used up”.
Ongoing activity: following politics is something you do repeatedly / continuously.

So seuraa politiikkaa is the natural way to say “follows politics” in Finnish.

Why does seurata use the partitive (politiikkaa)? Could it ever take a different case?

In most everyday uses like this, seurata + object uses the partitive because the action is:

ongoing, and
the object is not a clearly delimited quantity.

Examples:

seurata uutisia = to follow the news (repeatedly, not a fixed amount)
seurata urheilua = to follow sports (in general)

In some more specialized or concrete contexts, you can see other cases when there’s a clearly bounded object or event, often with a nuance change, but for general “to follow X (as a hobby/interest)”, the partitive is what you should learn as the default:

seurata politiikkaa (correct, natural)
seurata politiikan would sound unidiomatic or would need a very specific, different structure to make sense.

What form is tarkasti, and how is it related to tarkka?

tarkasti is an adverb, meaning “carefully, closely, accurately, precisely”.

It comes from the adjective tarkka (exact, precise, careful). In Finnish, many adverbs are formed from adjectives by adding -sti to a stem:

tarkka → tarkasti (carefully, accurately)
nopea (fast) → nopeasti (quickly)
hyvä (good) → hyvin (well; this one is irregular)

So:

seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti = follows politics carefully / pays close attention to politics.

What tense and person are the verbs seuraa and lukee?

Both verbs are:

person: 3rd person singular
tense: present tense
mood: indicative

With infinitives:

seurata → hän seuraa (he/she follows)
lukea → hän lukee (he/she reads)

In Finnish, the present tense is used for:

actions happening now
habitual actions (things someone does regularly)

So seuraa and lukee here describe your friend’s habitual behaviour: they regularly follow politics and read the news.

Why is it lukee uutisia instead of lukee uutiset?

uutisia is the partitive plural of uutinen (a news item) / uutiset (the news).

lukee uutisia literally: “reads (some) news (items)”
- partitive plural: uutisia
- suggests an open-ended amount, some news in general
lukee uutiset literally: “reads the news (all of it / the set of news)”
- nominative/accusative plural: uutiset
- suggests a more complete set, like “reads the (whole) news bulletin/paper”

In this context:

lukee uutisia joka aamu emphasizes a habit: every morning they read news (some articles, some items – not necessarily all possible news).
If you said lukee uutiset joka aamu, it could sound more like they systematically go through the whole news, e.g. all the main headlines or the entire newspaper.

For a natural, general statement of habit, lukee uutisia joka aamu is the usual phrasing.

What exactly does joka aamu mean, and why not jokainen aamu?

Both joka aamu and jokainen aamu can be translated as “every morning”, but:

joka aamu is the most natural, standard phrase in this kind of sentence.
jokainen aamu is grammatically correct but sounds heavier / more emphatic, like stressing each and every single morning.

Structure:

joka = “every, each” (used in certain fixed time expressions)
aamu = morning

Similar common phrases:

joka päivä = every day
joka viikko = every week
joka vuosi = every year

So lukee uutisia joka aamu = reads news every morning in a neutral, natural way.

Can I change the word order, for example: Joka aamu kaverini seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti ja lukee uutisia?

Yes, Finnish word order is fairly flexible, and this version is grammatically correct:

Joka aamu kaverini seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti ja lukee uutisia.
→ Every morning, my friend follows politics closely and reads the news.

Differences in feel:

Kaverini seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti ja lukee uutisia joka aamu.
- neutral order: Subject – Verbs – Objects – Time
- focus starts with your friend.
Joka aamu kaverini seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti ja lukee uutisia.
- puts joka aamu at the beginning, highlighting “every morning”, the regularity.

Both are correct; Finnish often uses word order to add subtle emphasis, not to change basic grammar.

Why do we need ja (“and”) between the two verbs? Could we just list the actions without it?

In standard Finnish, if you join two finite verbs (like seuraa and lukee) in one sentence, you normally use ja (and) between them:

Kaverini seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti ja lukee uutisia joka aamu.

Leaving out ja would sound unnatural or ungrammatical in written language:

✗ Kaverini seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti, lukee uutisia joka aamu.
(This sounds like a punctuation error or two separate sentences run together.)

So: keep ja when you coordinate two main verbs with the same subject in a single clause.

How would I say “My friend does not follow politics closely and does not read the news every morning”?

You negate the verbs with ei and use enklisi forms:

Kaverini ei seuraa politiikkaa tarkasti eikä lue uutisia joka aamu.
- ei seuraa = does not follow
- eikä lue = and does not read

Notes:

You use ei
- verb base for the first verb: ei seuraa.
For the second, you typically use eikä
- verb: eikä lue = and (he/she) does not read.

The rest of the case forms (politiikkaa, uutisia, joka aamu) stay the same.