Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.

Breakdown of Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.

me
we
aloittaa
to start
kilpailu
the competition
lämmitellä
to warm up
sen jälkeen kun
after
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.

What does sen jälkeen kun literally mean, and why do we need both sen jälkeen and kun?

Literally, sen jälkeen kun is:

  • sen = of that / that’s (genitive of se “it/that”)
  • jälkeen = after (a postposition)
  • kun = a subordinating conjunction, here meaning when / after

So a very literal gloss is: “after that, when …”

In practice, sen jälkeen kun is a fixed, very common way to say “after (something happens)”:

  • Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.
    = After we have warmed up, we (will) start the competition.

You could also say kun olemme lämmitelleet on its own (see below), but sen jälkeen kun makes the “after” / sequence meaning explicit and a bit more formal or clear. It strongly emphasises afterwards, following that rather than just when / once.

Why is it sen and not se in sen jälkeen?

Jälkeen is a postposition that always takes its complement in the genitive case.

  • se (nominative) = it / that
  • sen (genitive) = of it / of that

Because of jälkeen, you must use the genitive: sen jälkeen = after that.

This works the same with nouns:

  • tuntitunnin jälkeen = after an hour
  • pelipelin jälkeen = after the game

So sen jälkeen is literally after that, with sen in genitive because jälkeen requires it.

Could I leave out sen jälkeen and just say Kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun?

Yes, you can:

  • Kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.

This is perfectly correct and very natural. It usually means the same in context: When / once we have warmed up, we (will) start the competition – effectively “after we have warmed up”.

Nuance:

  • Kun olemme lämmitelleet …
    Focuses on the time when/once that condition is fulfilled.
  • Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet …
    Explicitly highlights “afterwards, following that”, so it sounds a bit more explicit, slightly more formal/emphatic about the sequence.

Both are good; kun alone is extremely common in speech.

Why is it olemme lämmitelleet and not a simple present like lämmittelemme?

Olemme lämmitelleet is the present perfect in Finnish:

  • olemme = we are / we have (1st person plural of olla, to be)
  • lämmitelleet = active past participle, plural (from lämmitellä)

So olemme lämmitelleetwe have warmed up.

Using the perfect here shows that the warming up is completed before the action in the main clause:

  • Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.
    After we have warmed up, we start the competition.

If you said:

  • Kun lämmittelemme, aloitamme kilpailun.

it would sound like “While we are warming up, we start the competition”, i.e. overlapping in time, not a clear “first X, then Y”.

So the perfect olemme lämmitelleet marks the warm‑up as a finished action that comes before starting the competition.

What exactly is lämmitelleet formed from, and what does the -lleet part mean?

Lämmitelleet is:

  • verb: lämmitellä (to warm up, often about people/sports)
  • stem: lämmitelle-
  • ending: -et (part of the active past participle plural)

Form: active past participle, plural.

In the combination olemme lämmitelleet, it functions exactly like the English “have warmed up”:

  • olemme lämmitelleet = we have warmed up

The active past participle can also be used like an adjective:

  • lämmitelleet urheilijat = the athletes who have warmed up

So -lleet is just what you see in this particular verb’s participle form; it’s not a separate, general suffix with standalone meaning.

Why is there no separate word for “we” in olemme lämmitelleet?

In Finnish, the personal ending on the verb normally shows the subject, so a separate pronoun is usually not needed:

  • olemme = we are / we have (the -mme ending marks we)

So:

  • Olemme lämmitelleet. = We have warmed up.

Adding the pronoun me is possible but gives emphasis:

  • Me olemme lämmitelleet.
    = We have warmed up (as opposed to somebody else).

In your sentence, olemme lämmitelleet is the standard, neutral way. The subject “we” is already encoded in the verb ending -mme.

What is the difference between lämmitellä and lämmittää?

Both relate to warming/heating, but they’re used differently:

  • lämmittää

    • Basic meaning: to heat / to warm something (else)
    • Typically used when you heat an object or a place:
      • Lämmittää saunaa. = To heat the sauna.
      • Lämmittää ruokaa. = To heat food.
  • lämmitellä

    • Frequentative / iterative form: roughly “to warm up (for a while)”
    • Very common in sports / physical context:
      • Lämmitellä ennen peliä. = To warm up before the game.

In olemme lämmitelleet, the meaning is specifically “we have done our warm‑up exercises”, not simply “we have heated something.”

Why does kilpailu appear as kilpailun with -n at the end?

Kilpailu = competition (nominative).
In aloitamme kilpailun, kilpailun is the object of the verb aloitamme (we start).

For a singular, total object in this kind of sentence, Finnish uses a form that looks like the genitive (ending -n):

  • aloitamme kilpailun = we start the competition

So:

  • nominative: kilpailu (a/the competition)
  • genitive / accusative (object form here): kilpailun (the competition as a whole, completed event)

This is just how Finnish marks a complete / bounded object in the affirmative: it uses the -n form.

Why is it aloitamme kilpailun and not aloitamme kilpailua?

This is about the object case: genitive/accusative vs. partitive.

  • Kilpailun (with -n) = total object: the whole thing, a bounded event.

    • aloitamme kilpailun = we (will) start the competition (as a definite, complete event).
  • Kilpailua (partitive) would normally suggest an unbounded / ongoing action or “some competition” in a non‑completed sense. With aloittaa, this would feel odd, because starting something is naturally a discrete, bounded event.

So aloitamme kilpailun is the normal choice. Aloittaa + partitive can occur in other contexts (e.g. starting to do some ongoing activity), but with a specific kilpailu, you want the total object kilpailun.

Why is there a comma before aloitamme kilpailun?

Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet is a subordinate clause (time clause), and aloitamme kilpailun is the main clause.

In Finnish, the rule is:

  • When a subordinate clause comes first, it is usually followed by a comma, and then the main clause:
    • Kun olemme syöneet, menemme kotiin.
    • Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.

If you reverse the order (main clause first), the comma often disappears in everyday writing:

  • Aloitamme kilpailun sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet.

So the comma marks the boundary between the initial subordinate clause and the main clause.

Can I reverse the order and say Aloitamme kilpailun sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet?

Yes, that is absolutely correct and natural:

  • Aloitamme kilpailun sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet.

Meaning is the same: We (will) start the competition after we have warmed up.

Differences:

  • Subordinate clause first (your original):
    • Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.
    • Slightly more formal; puts more focus on the condition / the time.
  • Main clause first:
    • Aloitamme kilpailun sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet.
    • Slightly more neutral; first says what will happen, then when.

Both are fine Finnish; word order mainly affects emphasis and style, not basic meaning.

Could I say Lämmittelyn jälkeen aloitamme kilpailun instead? Does it mean the same thing?

Yes, that’s another natural way to say it:

  • Lämmittelyn jälkeen aloitamme kilpailun.
    • lämmittely = warm‑up (noun)
    • lämmittelyn jälkeen = after the warm‑up

This version uses a noun + postposition:

  • lämmittely (warm‑up) → lämmittelyn jälkeen (after the warm‑up)

Compared to:

  • Sen jälkeen kun olemme lämmitelleet, aloitamme kilpailun.
    • Focuses on the action (we have warmed up).

Both express essentially the same idea; the original sentence describes the completed action, while lämmittelyn jälkeen packs it into a noun phrase.

How would the meaning change if I put the whole thing in the past, like Sen jälkeen kun olimme lämmitelleet, aloitimme kilpailun?

That sentence is fully in the past:

  • olimme lämmitelleet = we had warmed up (past perfect)
  • aloitimme kilpailun = we started the competition (past)

So:

  • Sen jälkeen kun olimme lämmitelleet, aloitimme kilpailun.
    = After we had warmed up, we started the competition.

Your original has:

  • olemme lämmitelleet (present perfect)
  • aloitamme (present, used for future)

So it refers to a future or planned sequence from the speaker’s viewpoint:

  • After we have warmed up, we will start the competition.

Changing both verbs to past moves the whole sequence into already completed past events.