Learn Hardcore Finnish: Luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona. - I read the contract carefully at home.

Luen – “I read / I will read” (1st person singular, present tense of lukea, to read)
sopimuksen – “(the) contract” as a direct object in the genitive/accusative case
tarkasti – “carefully” (adverb, manner)
kotona – “at home” (inessive case: in/at home)

So the structure is: I-read the-contract carefully at-home.

Why is there no separate word for “the” before sopimuksen?

Finnish does not use articles (a, an, the) at all.
The noun sopimuksen just means “contract” in a form that marks it as the object of the verb.

Whether English needs “a contract” or “the contract” is understood from context, not from a specific Finnish word. In many contexts sopimuksen would be translated as “the contract” because you’re usually talking about a specific contract you both know about.

What form is luen, and why isn’t the pronoun minä used?

Luen is:
- verb: lukea (to read)
- tense: present indicative
- person/number: 1st person singular (“I”)

In Finnish, the personal ending -n on luen already tells us the subject is “I”, so the pronoun minä is usually omitted unless you want to emphasize it:

Luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona. – I’ll read the contract carefully at home.
Minä luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona. – I (as opposed to someone else) will read the contract carefully at home.

Both are grammatically correct; the version without minä is more neutral and typical.

Does luen mean “I read” or “I will read”? How do I know?

Finnish present tense often covers both English present and future meanings.
So luen can be:

“I read / I am reading” (present)
“I will read / I’m going to read” (future)

Context decides. In this sentence, with a specific contract and tarkasti kotona, it naturally sounds like a planned, future action:

Luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona.
→ “I’ll read the contract carefully at home.”

If you needed to emphasize futurity, you’d usually use an adverb of time:

Huomenna luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona. – Tomorrow I’ll read the contract carefully at home.

Why is it sopimuksen and not just sopimus?

Sopimuksen is the genitive/accusative singular form of sopimus (“contract”). In this sentence it acts as a total object of the verb lukea:

Luen sopimuksen. – I (will) read the whole contract.

When you read the whole thing, the object is in genitive/accusative: sopimuksen.
If you were only reading part of it or some contracts in general, you’d use the partitive:

Luen sopimusta. – I’m (in the middle of) reading the contract / I read some of the contract.

So sopimuksen signals a complete, bounded action (“read it through”).

Is sopimuksen genitive or accusative? I’ve heard both terms used.

Formally, sopimuksen looks like the genitive singular of sopimus, but in object position (like in this sentence) it functions as the accusative (the “whole object” form).

So you will see two descriptions:

Morphology: “genitive singular form”
Syntactic role: “accusative object” or “total object”

For learning purposes, you can remember:
Direct object, whole thing, one item → -n form (here: sopimuksen).

Could I also say Luen sopimusta tarkasti kotona? What’s the difference?

Yes, but the meaning changes:

Luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona.
→ I will read the whole contract carefully at home (a completed action).
Luen sopimusta tarkasti kotona.
→ I am (in general / at that time) reading the contract, focusing on the ongoing activity.
It doesn’t say you finish it.

So:

sopimuksen – total object: emphasizes completion and wholeness.
sopimusta – partitive object: emphasizes the process or partialness.

What kind of word is tarkasti, and how is it formed?

Tarkasti is an adverb of manner, meaning “carefully, thoroughly, precisely”.

It is formed from the adjective tarkka (“careful, exact”) by adding -sti, a common adverb ending:

nopea (fast) → nopeasti (quickly)
hiljainen (quiet) → hiljaa / hiljaisesti (quietly)
tarkka (careful) → tarkasti (carefully)

So tarkasti tells us how you read the contract.

Does word order matter? Could I say Luen tarkasti sopimuksen kotona?

Word order in Finnish is flexible, but it affects focus and naturalness.

All of these are grammatical:

Luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona.
Luen sopimuksen kotona tarkasti.
Kotona luen sopimuksen tarkasti.
Tarkasti luen sopimuksen kotona.

Differences:

The neutral and most typical word order is:
Verb – object – adverbials → Luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona.
Items later in the sentence get more emphasis/focus.
So here kotona is slightly emphasized: where will you read it? At home.

Luen tarkasti sopimuksen kotona is understandable but less natural; Finnish usually keeps the object directly after the verb in a sentence like this.

What does the ending -na in kotona mean?

Kotona is the inessive case of koti (“home”).

koti – home (basic form)
kotona – at home, in home

The inessive -ssa / -ssä / -na / -nä typically means “in, inside, at” depending on the word. For koti, the special inessive form is kotona (not kotissa).

Compare:

talossa – in the house
kaupungissa – in the city
kotona – at home

So kotona answers the question: Where? → At home.

What is the difference between kotona, kotiin, and kotoa?

These are different local cases of koti:

kotona – inessive: “at home” (static location)
kotiin – illative: “(to) home” (movement towards home)
kotoa – elative: “from home” (movement from home)

Examples:

Olen kotona. – I’m at home.
Menen kotiin. – I’m going home.
Lähden kotoa. – I’m leaving home.

In your sentence, you’re describing where you will read, so kotona (location) is correct.

How do I know that sopimuksen is singular, not plural?

The base word sopimus ends in -s and forms the genitive/accusative singular as:

sopimus → sopimuksen

The plural forms look different:

sopimusten – genitive plural (“of the contracts”)
sopimuksia – partitive plural (“contracts” as an indefinite quantity)

So sopimuksen here clearly refers to one contract, not many.

Why isn’t there any special future tense form, like “will read”?

Finnish doesn’t have a separate future tense form. The present tense is used instead, and time expressions or context indicate futurity:

Luen sopimuksen. – I read / I will read the contract.
Luen sopimuksen huomenna. – I will read the contract tomorrow.
Kohta luen sopimuksen. – I’m about to read / I’ll soon read the contract.

So Luen sopimuksen tarkasti kotona is naturally understood as future in most contexts, even though the verb form is “present.”