Learn Hardcore Finnish: Syödessämme iltapalaa luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen. - While we are eating an evening snack, we read the newsletter’s headlines aloud.

Verb: syödä – to eat
3rd infinitive inessive: syödessä – while eating / when (someone) eats
Possessive suffix -mme (1st person plural “we”): syödessämme – while we are eating / when we eat

So grammatically it means “in the time of our eating”, which is why it can translate as “while we’re eating” or “when we eat”.

Why use syödessämme instead of a full clause like kun syömme?

Both are correct, but they belong to slightly different styles:

Syödessämme iltapalaa, luemme…
- Uses a non‑finite construction.
- Feels a bit more compact and somewhat more written / formal.
- Very common in narratives, instructions, and written descriptions.
Kun syömme iltapalaa, luemme…
- Uses a full subordinate clause with kun (when).
- Feels a bit more neutral and explicit, often easier for learners.

In meaning, they are almost the same: both express that the reading happens at the same time as the eating. The participle construction just packages that time relationship into one word (syödessämme) instead of a separate “when”-clause.

Why is the -mme ending used both in syödessämme and in luemme? Doesn’t that repeat “we” twice?

It looks redundant from an English perspective, but in Finnish each form has its own job:

In syödessämme, -mme is a possessive suffix attached to a non‑finite verb. It marks who is doing the eating in that “while doing X” construction.
In luemme, -mme is the personal ending of a finite verb, marking we as the subject of the main clause.

So:

syödessämme = while we are eating
luemme = we read / we are reading

In standard Finnish, syödessä without the suffix would feel incomplete here, because then it wouldn’t clearly say who is doing the eating. When the subject of the non‑finite verb is the same as the main clause subject, you normally show that with the possessive suffix.

Why is it iltapalaa and not iltapala after syödessämme?

Because Finnish usually uses the partitive case for food and drink when the amount is unspecified or partial.

iltapala = the base form (“evening snack” as a whole thing)
iltapalaa = partitive singular, “(some) evening snack / an evening snack”

With verbs like syödä (to eat) and juoda (to drink), the default when you don’t state an exact quantity is:

Syön iltapalaa. – I’m (having) some evening snack.
Juon kahvia. – I drink coffee / I’m having some coffee.

If you used iltapala in the nominative or accusative, it would suggest a clearly delimited whole (“the entire snack”), which is rarer in everyday speech unless you’re emphasizing finishing it.

What’s going on with uutiskirjeen otsikoita? Why those particular forms?

This is a noun + its modifier, each in a different case for a reason:

uutiskirjeen – genitive singular of uutiskirje (newsletter)
- Genitive is used to show possession or a close relationship:
  - uutiskirjeen otsikot = the newsletter’s headlines / the headlines of the newsletter
otsikoita – partitive plural of otsikko (headline)
- Partitive plural indicates an indefinite number or some of them, not all.

So:

uutiskirjeen otsikoita literally = some headlines of the newsletter
That fits well with the idea that while eating, you’re probably reading some of the headlines aloud, not necessarily all of them.

Could we say uutiskirjeen otsikot instead of uutiskirjeen otsikoita? What would change?

Yes, you can say uutiskirjeen otsikot, but the nuance changes:

uutiskirjeen otsikoita (partitive plural)
- Implies some headlines, not necessarily all.
- More natural if you’re just picking out a few.
uutiskirjeen otsikot (nominative/accusative plural)
- Tends to imply the whole set of headlines, or at least a complete set in some context.
- More like: “we read the (all) headlines of the newsletter aloud.”

So the original sentence with otsikoita fits the usual situation better: we read some of the newsletter’s headlines aloud while eating an evening snack.

What is ääneen exactly, and why is it used here?

Ääneen comes from the noun ääni (voice, sound). Grammatically it is the illative singular:

ääni – base form
ääneen – into voice / into sound

In practice, ääneen is used as an adverbial expression meaning:

ääneen lukea – to read aloud / out loud
puhua ääneen – to speak out loud
nauraa ääneen – to laugh out loud (so others can hear)

So in the sentence:

luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen
= we read the newsletter’s headlines aloud, i.e. so they are audible to others, not just silently in our heads.

Can we change the word order, for example: Luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen syödessämme iltapalaa? Does that sound natural?

Yes, that word order is grammatical and natural:

Syödessämme iltapalaa luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen.
Luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen syödessämme iltapalaa.

Finnish word order is relatively flexible. Both versions:

Keep syödessämme iltapalaa as a time/situation setting (“while we’re eating an evening snack”), and
Keep luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen as the main action.

Differences in emphasis:

Starting with Syödessämme iltapalaa lightly emphasizes the situation / time frame first.
Starting with Luemme lightly emphasizes the activity of reading first.

But the meaning is essentially the same; both are good standard Finnish.

Should there be a comma after syödessämme iltapalaa?

Style guides differ a bit, but in careful written Finnish it is common (and often recommended) to place a comma between an initial non‑finite clause and the main clause:

Syödessämme iltapalaa, luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen.

However, in short and tight sentences, especially in less formal contexts, the comma is sometimes omitted:

Syödessämme iltapalaa luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen.

Both can be seen in real texts. If you want to follow more traditional school‑grammar rules, using the comma here is the safer, textbook‑correct choice.

How is this different from simply saying Syömme iltapalaa ja luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen?

Both sentences describe two actions happening, but they present the relationship between them slightly differently:

Syödessämme iltapalaa luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen.
- Uses a temporal participle construction.
- Explicitly encodes that the reading happens during the eating.
- The eating is the background activity, and reading is the main action.
Syömme iltapalaa ja luemme uutiskirjeen otsikoita ääneen.
- Coordinates two finite verbs with ja (and).
- States that we eat and we read; it implies they are simultaneous, but doesn’t grammatically tie one as background for the other.
- Feels more like a neutral list of what we do.

In everyday conversation, both would usually be understood as “we read while we eat”, but the syödessämme‑version is more precise about that simultaneity and is stylistically a bit more compact and elegant.