Learn Hardcore Finnish: Kun olen keskittynyt peliin, en kuule, mitä katsomossa puhutaan. - When I am focused on the game, I do not hear what is being said in the stands.

jos = if (a condition that may or may not happen)
- Jos keskityn peliin, en kuule mitään. = If I focus on the game, I don’t hear anything.
kun = when(ever) (a situation that actually happens or is seen as real)
- Kun keskityn peliin, en kuule mitään. = When I focus on the game, I don’t hear anything (that’s what happens in that situation).

So kun states a real-time or habitual situation, jos states a hypothetical condition.

Why is there no minä (I)? How do we know it means “I”?

In Finnish, the personal pronoun is usually dropped because the verb ending already shows the person.

olen = I am (1st person singular)
en kuule = I don’t hear (1st person singular negative)

So:

Kun olen keskittynyt… = When I am focused…
…en kuule… = …I don’t hear…

You can add minä for emphasis or contrast:

Kun minä olen keskittynyt peliin, en kuule mitään.
→ Emphasizes I, like “When I am focused (as opposed to others)…”

What exactly is olen keskittynyt? Why not just keskityn?

keskityn = I focus / I am focusing (present tense, active: I am doing the focusing now)
olen keskittynyt = literally I have focused or I have become focused, but often used like an adjective: I am focused, I am in a state of concentration.

So:

Kun keskityn peliin = When I (am in the act of) focusing on the game…
Kun olen keskittynyt peliin = When I am (already) focused on the game…

The given sentence emphasizes the state of already being concentrated, not the process of starting to concentrate.

What grammatical form is keskittynyt?

Keskittynyt is the past active participle of the verb keskittyä (to concentrate, to focus).

Pattern: keskity- (verb stem) + nyt → keskittynyt

Used with olla (to be):

olen keskittynyt = I am (in a state of having concentrated) → I am focused
olin keskittynyt = I was focused
olemme keskittyneet = we are focused

Why is it peliin and not pelissä or peliä?

Keskittyä normally takes the illative case (-iin, “into / onto / toward”) to mark what you focus on:

keskittyä peliin = to focus on the game (literally: into the game)

Other cases would change the meaning:

pelissä (inessive “in the game”) → olla pelissä = to be in the game
peliä (partitive) → would not be correct after keskittyä; the verb requires illative for the target of concentration.

So peliin is required by the verb keskittyä.

Why is it en kuule instead of en kuulen?

In Finnish negatives, the negative verb (en, et, ei, emme, ette, eivät) carries the person, and the main verb appears in a special connegative form (here, the stem form):

Positive: minä kuulen = I hear
Negative: minä en kuule = I do not hear

So in the negative:

you do not add -n to kuule,
you mark 1st person only on en.

What is the difference between kuulla and kuunnella? Could we say en kuuntele?

kuulla = to hear (passively noticing something with your ears)
kuunnella = to listen (to) (actively paying attention)

In the sentence:

en kuule = I don’t hear → the sound doesn’t reach your awareness because you’re focused.

You could also say:

en kuuntele, mitä katsomossa puhutaan
= I don’t listen to what is being said in the stands.

That would emphasize that you’re not even trying to listen, rather than simply not perceiving it.

Why is there a comma after peliin?

Finnish usually uses a comma between a subordinate clause and the main clause.

Subordinate clause: Kun olen keskittynyt peliin (When I am focused on the game)
Main clause: en kuule, mitä katsomossa puhutaan (I don’t hear what is being spoken in the stands)

So you write:
Kun olen keskittynyt peliin, en kuule, mitä katsomossa puhutaan.

Similarly, there is another comma before mitä because that begins another subordinate clause (the object clause of en kuule).

What does mitä mean here, and why not mikä?

Both mikä and mitä can mean “what”, but they differ by case and function.

Here mitä is in the partitive case, used as the object of puhutaan:

mitä puhutaan = what (things) are being spoken / what is being talked about

Puhua (to speak, to talk) typically takes a partitive object when talking about an indefinite amount of speech or topics, so mitä is the natural form.

Some contrasts:

Mikä tämä on? = What is this? (subject, nominative)
En tiedä, mitä sanoa. = I don’t know what to say. (object, partitive)

What is katsomossa exactly, and why that case ending?

Katsomo = stands, seating area for spectators (in a stadium, arena, etc.).

Katsomossa is the inessive case (-ssa = “in, inside”):

katsomossa = in the stands → location where people are.

Other forms:

katsomoon (illative, “into the stands”)
katsomosta (elative, “out of / from the stands”)

Here we are talking about what is being said in that place, so katsomossa is appropriate.

What form is puhutaan and why is it used instead of puhuvat?

Puhutaan is the present passive / impersonal form of puhua.

puhutaan ≈ people speak / they speak / is spoken
It does not specify who is speaking; it is like English “people say…” or “is being talked about”.

If you said:

mitä katsomossa ihmiset puhuvat = what the people in the stands are speaking

that is grammatically fine but more explicit; the original style prefers the impersonal, focusing on the talk in general, not the specific speakers.

Why is it mitä katsomossa puhutaan and not mitä puhutaan katsomossa?

Both word orders are possible:

…en kuule, mitä katsomossa puhutaan.
…en kuule, mitä puhutaan katsomossa.

The meaning is the same. Finnish word order is relatively flexible; katsomossa can come before or after puhutaan.

Putting katsomossa earlier slightly foregrounds the place:

mitä katsomossa puhutaan → “what is being talked about in the stands”
mitä puhutaan katsomossa → “what is being talked about, in the stands” (place tagged on at the end)

The difference is very small; both sound natural.

Why is there a comma before mitä katsomossa puhutaan?

Because mitä katsomossa puhutaan is a subordinate clause functioning as the object of en kuule:

Main clause: en kuule = I do not hear
Object clause: mitä katsomossa puhutaan = what is being spoken in the stands

Finnish punctuation normally separates such subordinate clauses with a comma:

En tiedä, mitä sanoisin. = I don’t know what I would say.
Kuulin, mitä sanoit. = I heard what you said.

So en kuule, mitä katsomossa puhutaan follows that same pattern.

Can we say kun keskityn peliin instead of kun olen keskittynyt peliin? Is there a difference?

Yes, you can say:

Kun keskityn peliin, en kuule, mitä katsomossa puhutaan.

Difference in nuance:

kun keskityn → focuses on the process of focusing: when I (start to / am in the act of) focusing on the game…
kun olen keskittynyt → focuses on the state of already being concentrated: when I am (already) focused on the game…

In practice, both describe almost the same real-life situation; the version with olen keskittynyt just sounds a bit more like a stable, ongoing state.

Is mitä katsomossa puhutaan more like “what is said” or “what people are talking about”?

It can be understood in both ways:

Literally: “what is spoken in the stands”
Naturally in English: “what people are talking about in the stands”

Because puhutaan is impersonal, Finnish does not explicitly say “people”, but that is the implied subject. Context decides the best English translation, and here “what people are talking about in the stands” is the most natural.