Learn Hardcore Finnish: Jos on hätätilanne, ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat nopeasti paikalle. - If there is an emergency, the ambulance and the police come to the scene quickly.

Jos on hätätilanne = If there is an emergency (situation) → it’s only a possibility.
Kun on hätätilanne = When there is an emergency (situation) → it’s treated as something that does happen, at least sometimes, and you’re talking about what happens in that situation.

In this sentence, jos is correct because we’re talking about a hypothetical emergency: if there is one, then the ambulance and police will come quickly.

Why is there no word for “there” or “it” in Jos on hätätilanne?

Finnish doesn’t use a dummy subject like English “there is” or “it is”.

English: If there is an emergency…
Finnish: Jos on hätätilanne… (literally: If is an emergency-situation…)

The verb on (“is”) can appear without an explicit subject when you’re just stating the existence or presence of something. Finnish relies on context and word order, not a dummy pronoun.

So on hätätilanne already carries the idea “there is an emergency situation” without needing a separate there/it.

Why is it on hätätilanne and not hätätilanne on? Does the word order matter?

Yes, the word order changes the nuance:

On hätätilanne. → existential: There is an emergency situation. You’re introducing the existence of something.
Hätätilanne on. → sounds like “The emergency situation is (exists)” and is odd on its own. You’d normally expect something after it, like Hätätilanne on ohi (“The emergency situation is over”) or Hätätilanne on vakava (“The emergency situation is serious”).

In existential sentences (“there is/are …”), Finnish usually uses the pattern:

[verb “to be”] + [thing that exists]
On hätätilanne. = There is an emergency situation.

So Jos on hätätilanne is the natural pattern for “If there is an emergency situation.”

What exactly does hätätilanne mean, and is it a compound word?

Yes, hätätilanne is a compound noun:

hätä = emergency, distress
tilanne = situation

Combined: hätätilanne ≈ “emergency situation”, often just translated as “emergency” in natural English.

Compounds like this are extremely common in Finnish. Instead of using two separate words like English does (“emergency situation”), Finnish often joins them together into one:

paloauto = fire + car → fire engine
kännykkälaturi = mobile + charger → phone charger

So hätätilanne works exactly the same way.

Why doesn’t the Finnish sentence use articles like “an ambulance”, “the police”?

Finnish has no articles (a, an, the) at all. The bare noun covers all of those meanings, and context fills in the rest:

ambulanssi can mean an ambulance or the ambulance
poliisi can mean a police officer, the police officer, or the police (as an institution)

Here, ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat is naturally interpreted as “the ambulance and (the) police” because we’re talking about emergency services in this kind of situation, not just some random ambulance and random police.

Why is it tulevat and not tulee in ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat nopeasti paikalle?

Tulevat is the 3rd person plural form of tulla (“to come”), used because there are two subjects:

ambulanssi (ambulance)
poliisi (police)

In standard Finnish, if you have a compound subject connected with ja (“and”), the verb must be plural:

Ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat. = The ambulance and the police come/will come.

In casual spoken Finnish, many people might say tulee with multiple subjects (e.g. Ambulanssi ja poliisi tulee…), but in correct written language, tulevat is the right form.

Why is poliisi singular here? Doesn’t “the police” usually look plural in English?

English “the police” is grammatically plural, but Finnish poliisi is grammatically singular and can refer to:

a single police officer
the police as a whole (the institution)
“the police” in a general sense (like English does)

In this sentence, poliisi is understood as “the police (service)”, not just one officer. Finnish often uses a singular noun to refer to an institution or service:

paloauto ja poliisi tulivat = the fire engine and the police came

If you specifically want to talk about multiple individual officers, you can use poliisit (“police officers” in the plural).

What is the difference between nopeasti and nopea? Why is nopeasti used here?

nopea = adjective → fast, quick
nopeasti = adverb → quickly, fast

In English you also distinguish between:

a fast car (adjective)
the car drives fast / quickly (adverb)

Finnish does the same, and the -sti ending usually forms an adverb from an adjective:

nopea → nopeasti
hidas (slow) → hitaasti (slowly)

In this sentence, nopeasti modifies the verb tulevat (“they come”), so you need the adverb form:

tulevat nopeasti = they come quickly

What does paikalle mean, and how is it different from paikalla or paikkaan?

All of these are related to paikka (“place”), but they are different cases, with different meanings:

paikka = place (basic form)
paikalla (adessive) = at the place, on the spot (state: where something is)
paikkaan (illative) = into the place (movement into a specific place)
paikalle (allative) = to the place / to the scene (movement to a place, often “to the scene” where something is happening)

In emergency or event contexts, paikalle is very natural and idiomatic:

Ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat paikalle.
= The ambulance and the police come to the scene.

So paikalle emphasizes arrival to the location where something is happening, rather than just any random “place”.

Could you say paikalla instead of paikalle here?

Not in the same meaning.

tulevat paikalle = they come to the scene (movement to a location)
ovat paikalla = they are on the scene / present (being at a location)

You need a case of movement after tulevat (“come”), so paikalle (allative: to the place) fits. Paikalla expresses location (being there), not movement to there.

Can the word order be changed, like Ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat nopeasti paikalle, jos on hätätilanne?

Yes. Both are correct:

Jos on hätätilanne, ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat nopeasti paikalle.
Ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat nopeasti paikalle, jos on hätätilanne.

The meaning is the same. Finnish usually puts a comma between the conditional clause (with jos) and the main clause, regardless of the order.

The difference is mild emphasis:

Starting with Jos on hätätilanne highlights the condition.
Starting with Ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat… highlights the result/action.

Why is the verb in the present tense (tulevat) even though in English we’d probably say “will come”?

Finnish typically uses the present tense where English uses a future tense:

Jos on hätätilanne, ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat nopeasti paikalle.
= literally If there is an emergency situation, the ambulance and the police come quickly to the scene.

But in natural English, we’d say:

If there is an emergency, the ambulance and the police *will come quickly.*

Finnish doesn’t have a separate will/shall-type future tense. The present is used for:

general truths: Aurinko nousee idästä. (The sun rises in the east.)
scheduled events: Juna lähtee kymmeneltä. (The train leaves at ten.)
conditional futures: Jos sataa, pysymme kotona. (If it rains, we will stay home.)

Context tells you it’s about the future.

Could you drop on and say Jos hätätilanne, ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat… like in English “If emergency, …”?

No. In standard Finnish, you cannot drop on here.

You need a finite verb in the clause:

Jos on hätätilanne… ✅
Jos hätätilanne… ❌ (ungrammatical in normal Finnish)

While English sometimes allows shortened structures (especially in headlines or notes: “If emergency, call 911”), Finnish still requires the verb on to make it a proper sentence.

Where can nopeasti go in the sentence? Are other word orders possible?

The given one is:

Ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat nopeasti paikalle.

You could also say, for example:

Ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat paikalle nopeasti.

Both are acceptable and mean essentially the same thing. The default, most neutral position for an adverb like nopeasti is before the verb’s complement (paikalle), so the original version is very natural.

Putting nopeasti at the very beginning (Nopeasti ambulanssi ja poliisi tulevat paikalle) is possible but sounds more stylistic or emphatic, not neutral.

How should hätätilanne be pronounced, especially the ä and the double n?

Break it into syllables: hä-tä-til-an-ne.

ä is like a in English “cat” or “bad” (but a bit “purer,” without glide).
Double consonants like nn are held longer than a single n. It’s similar to how English might “hold” a consonant when you really enunciate (e.g. “unnamed” vs “unamed”).

So:

hätä ≈ HÄ-ta
tilanne ≈ TI-lan-ne, with a clear, slightly longer n sound in the middle: lan-ne, not la-ne.

Putting it together smoothly gives you hätätilanne.