He muuttivat strategiaa puoliajalla ja paransivat tulosta selvästi.

They changed the strategy at halftime and clearly improved the result.

Breakdown of He muuttivat strategiaa puoliajalla ja paransivat tulosta selvästi.

• ja: and
• muuttaa: to change
• parantaa: to improve
• selvästi: clearly
• he: they
• tulos: the result
• strategia: the strategy
• puoliajalla: at halftime

Questions & Answers about He muuttivat strategiaa puoliajalla ja paransivat tulosta selvästi.

Does He mean he (one male person) in this sentence?

No. In Finnish, he always means they (a group of people), never he as in “one male person.”

• he = they (people, human beings)
• ne = they for things/animals in neutral speech, but many Finns also use ne for people in spoken language
• The third person singular he/she is hän (gender‑neutral).

So He muuttivat… = They changed…

Why do the verbs end in -ivat: muuttivat and paransivat?

The ending -ivat / -vät marks past tense with a 3rd person plural subject.

• Verb stem + i (past marker) + vat /vät (they)
• muuttaa → stem muutta- → muuttivat = “they changed”
• parantaa → stem paranta- → paransivat (a bit irregular) = “they improved”

So the form muuttivat / paransivat tells you:

• tense: past
• person/number: 3rd person plural (they)

Why is it strategiaa and not strategian?

Strategiaa is in the partitive case, not the accusative/genitive strategian. With muuttaa (“to change”), using the partitive often suggests:

• changing in some way / to some extent, not necessarily a complete, one‑time, fully “finished” change
• a more general “they adjusted/modified their strategy”

Nuance difference:

• He muuttivat strategiaa.
  = They changed/adjusted (their) strategy (to some extent; more open‑ended).
• He muuttivat strategian.
  = They (completely) changed the strategy (more like replacing one specific strategy with another, a more “total” change).

In everyday speech, muuttaa strategiaa is the normal, idiomatic way to say “change strategy.”

Why is tulosta in the partitive case instead of tuloksen?

Again, this is about the partitive object expressing an incomplete/partial change or quantity.

• tulos = result
• tulosta = partitive singular “(some) result”

With parantaa (“to improve”), the partitive suggests “improve the result to some extent / in degree,” not turn it fully into some new, clearly delimited result:

• He paransivat tulosta selvästi.
  = They improved the result clearly / significantly. (Result got better by some amount.)
• He paransivat tuloksen.
  = They (completely) fixed or perfected the result. (Sounds like they brought it to some clear, final satisfactory state.)

In sports or performance contexts, parantaa tulosta is the standard expression for “improve the result / score / time.”

What does puoliajalla literally mean, and what case is it?

Puoliajalla is adessive case singular of puoliaika (“half-time” in sports).

• puoliaika = half-time
• puoliajalla = “at half-time”

The -lla/-llä adessive ending is used for:

• physical location: pöydällä = on the table
• certain time expressions: yöllä = at night, jouluLLA = at Christmas time, puoliajalla = at half-time

So puoliajalla corresponds to English “at half-time” (point or short period of time).

Why isn’t there a word for “at” or “during”? How is that shown in Finnish?

Finnish usually does not use separate prepositions like “at/during” for times. Instead, it uses case endings on the noun itself.

Compare:

• puoliaika (half-time) + -lla → puoliajalla = at half-time
• joulu (Christmas) + -na → jouluna = at Christmas
• kesä (summer) + -llä or -nä depending on idiom → in (the) summer

If you want to say “during half-time” more explicitly, you can say:

• puoliajan aikana = during half-time
  (but puoliajalla is perfectly normal and often enough)

Can the word order be different, like Puoliajalla he muuttivat strategiaa…?

Yes. Finnish word order is flexible, and you can move elements for emphasis or information structure.

All of these are grammatical (context decides which sounds most natural):

• He muuttivat strategiaa puoliajalla ja paransivat tulosta selvästi.
  Neutral: “They changed strategy at half-time…”
• Puoliajalla he muuttivat strategiaa ja paransivat tulosta selvästi.
  Emphasizes the time: “At half-time, they changed strategy…”
• Strategiaa he muuttivat puoliajalla ja paransivat tulosta selvästi.
  Emphasizes what they changed (might answer what they changed, in contrast to something else).

Basic rule: The finite verb (here muuttivat) normally comes after the first clause element (subject, adverb, object, etc.), but which element comes first is flexible.

What does selvästi mean here exactly? “Clearly”? “A lot”?

Selvästi is an adverb formed from the adjective selvä (“clear, obvious”).

• selvä (clear) → selvästi (clearly, obviously)

In this context, selvästi can be understood in two overlapping ways:

1. clearly, noticeably – the improvement was obvious to see
2. significantly – not just a tiny improvement

So paransivat tulosta selvästi ≈
“They clearly improved the result” / “They improved the result significantly.”

Both shades of meaning (obviousness and degree) are natural here.

Are strategiaa and tulosta singular or plural?

They are both singular, in the partitive singular case.

• strategia (nom. sg) → strategiaa (partitive sg)
• tulos (nom. sg) → tulosta (partitive sg)

The form doesn’t tell you “a strategy” vs “the strategy”; Finnish has no articles. Context usually implies:

• strategiaa here = “(their/the) strategy”
• tulosta here = “(the) result / score / performance result”

Plural partitives would be strategioita, tuloksia, which are not used in this sentence.

Why is there no word for “their” before strategiaa?

Finnish often omits possessive words (like “my, your, their”) when the possessor is already clear from context, especially with a human subject.

• He muuttivat strategiaa.
  Literally: “They changed strategy.”
  Naturally understood as: “They changed their strategy.”

If you want to be explicit, you can say:

• He muuttivat strategiaansa.
  (“They changed their strategy.”)
  Here strategiaansa includes a possessive suffix -nsa = “their.”

But in a sports context, He muuttivat strategiaa is usually already clearly “their strategy,” so no extra marking is necessary.

Could I say He muuttivat strategiansa instead of strategiaa?

You could, but the nuance changes.

• He muuttivat strategiaa.
  – They changed/adjusted (their) strategy (more open‑ended, process/degree).
• He muuttivat strategiansa.
  – They changed their (entire) strategy.
  Sounds more like a complete replacement of one defined strategy with another.

Adding the possessive suffix -nsa (strategiansa) also makes the possession explicit: their strategy. But the choice of partitive vs non‑partitive still carries that partial vs total / process vs completed nuance.

Can this sentence be used outside of sports, or is puoliaika only for games?

Puoliaika is primarily a sports term (“half-time” in games like football/soccer, basketball, etc.). So the exact sentence is naturally read in a sports / match context.

In a non-sports context you’d more likely use:

• tauko = break
• lounastauolla = at lunch break
• kokouksen puolivälissä = in the middle of the meeting

But structurally, the grammar you see in the sentence is normal and reusable in other contexts; only the specific noun puoliaika is sports-specific.

Is there any continuous or “were changing” meaning in muuttivat or paransivat?

No. Finnish verbs don’t have a separate continuous/progressive tense like English was changing / were improving.

• muuttivat can mean “they changed” or, from context, “they were changing,”
• paransivat can mean “they improved” or “they were improving,”

The aspect (simple vs continuous) is inferred from context, not from verb form. Here, muuttivat and paransivat are just simple past, and English translators choose “changed / improved” because that’s the most natural rendering.