Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipuli.

The best ingredient of this soup is garlic.

Breakdown of Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipuli.

• olla: to be
• tämä: this
• keitto: the soup
• paras: best
• valkosipuli: the garlic
• ainesosa: the ingredient

Questions & Answers about Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipuli.

What are the dictionary forms and grammatical forms of each word in Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipuli?

• tämän

  • Dictionary form: tämä (this)
  • Form here: genitive singular (tämän)

• keiton

  • Dictionary form: keitto (soup)
  • Form here: genitive singular (keiton)

• paras

  • Dictionary form: paras (best)
  • This is the superlative form of hyvä (good):
    
    • hyvä → parempi (better) → paras (best)
  • Case/number here: nominative singular

• ainesosa

  • Dictionary form: ainesosa (ingredient)
  • Case/number here: nominative singular

• on

  • Dictionary form: olla (to be)
  • Form here: 3rd person singular present: on (is)

• valkosipuli

  • Dictionary form: valkosipuli (garlic)
  • Case/number here: nominative singular

Why is tämän used instead of tämä?

Tämän is the genitive singular form of tämä (“this”). It is used because it has to agree with keiton, which is also in the genitive.

The phrase tämän keiton literally means “of this soup / this soup’s”. In Finnish, when you express something like “this soup’s best ingredient”, the possessor (this soup) is put in the genitive:

• tämä keitto = this soup (basic form)
• tämän keiton paras ainesosa = this soup’s best ingredient

Why is keitto in the form keiton and not just keitto?

Keiton is the genitive singular of keitto. Finnish uses the genitive to show a “belongs to / of” relationship.

So tämän keiton paras ainesosa is literally “this soup’s best ingredient” or “the best ingredient of this soup”.

If you used keitto in nominative (tämä keitto paras ainesosa), it would be ungrammatical in standard Finnish. The relationship “ingredient of this soup” requires the genitive form keiton.

Why are both tämän and keiton in the genitive case?

In Finnish, determiners and adjectives generally agree in case and number with the noun they modify. Here:

• Head noun: keitto → keiton (genitive)
• Determiner: tämä → tämän (genitive to match keiton)

So you get:

• tämä keitto (this soup – both nominative)
• tämän keiton (of this soup – both genitive)

This agreement is the normal pattern: tämän ison keiton (of this big soup), where tämän / ison / keiton all match in case and number.

Which part is the subject here: tämän keiton paras ainesosa or valkosipuli?

In sentences with olla (“to be”), both sides look like possible subjects because they are in the nominative. In practice, you can think of:

• tämän keiton paras ainesosa = “the best ingredient of this soup” → the grammatical subject
• valkosipuli = “garlic” → the predicative complement (what the subject is)

So structurally:

• Tämän keiton paras ainesosa (subject) on (verb) valkosipuli (predicative).

However, semantically it’s almost symmetrical: “The best ingredient of this soup is garlic” ↔ “Garlic is the best ingredient of this soup.” The difference is mostly word order and emphasis.

Can I switch the word order and say Valkosipuli on tämän keiton paras ainesosa? Does it change the meaning?

Yes, Valkosipuli on tämän keiton paras ainesosa is perfectly correct. The basic meaning is the same: “Garlic is the best ingredient in this soup.”

The difference is in emphasis:

• Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipuli.

  • Focus often felt on valkosipuli (answering “What is the best ingredient?”).

• Valkosipuli on tämän keiton paras ainesosa.

  • Focus often felt on tämän keiton paras ainesosa (answering “What is garlic (in this context)? It is this soup’s best ingredient.”).

In normal conversation, both are natural; the context and intonation carry most of the emphasis.

Why is valkosipuli in the basic form (nominative) and not valkosipulia (partitive)?

Nominative valkosipuli is used because we are talking about garlic as a whole kind / category and making an equality statement:

• “The best ingredient is (the thing called) garlic.”

The partitive valkosipulia would either:

1. Sound like an existential/quantity statement:

   • Tässä keitossa on valkosipulia. = “There is (some) garlic in this soup.”

2. Or suggest an incomplete/indefinite amount in some other context.

In predicate sentences of the type “X is Y”, when Y refers to a whole category (a role, profession, ingredient type, etc.), Finnish normally uses the nominative:

• Hän on opettaja. = He/she is a teacher.
• Tämä on ongelma. = This is a problem.
• Paras ainesosa on valkosipuli. = The best ingredient is garlic.

Could I say Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipulia? Would that mean something different?

That would be unusual and mostly incorrect in standard Finnish for this meaning. It would sound like you are treating valkosipulia as an indefinite amount of garlic rather than “garlic” as the identified best ingredient.

If you change the sentence pattern, then valkosipulia can make sense:

• Tässä keitossa parasta on valkosipuli. (normal)
• Tässä keitossa parasta on valkosipuli / valkosipuli siinä.
• Tässä keitossa parasta on valkosipuli, jota siinä on paljon.

But in the exact structure “X on Y” with Y being a category/identity, nominative valkosipuli is the natural choice.

Why do we say ainesosa here instead of something like raaka-aine or osa?

These words have related but different nuances:

• ainesosa

  • The normal word for an ingredient in food, cosmetics, chemical mixtures, etc.
  • Sounds like what you see on an ingredient list.

• raaka-aine

  • More like “raw material”.
  • Used for industrial materials, agriculture, or the raw form of a substance (e.g. wood as raw material, crude oil, etc.).
  • Can be used for food, but feels more technical or industrial than ainesosa.

• osa

  • Very general: “part, component, section”.
  • Tämän keiton paras osa would literally be “the best part of this soup”, which is more about a portion or aspect of the soup, not specifically an ingredient.

So for “ingredient in this soup”, ainesosa is the most natural everyday choice.

What exactly does paras mean here, and how is it related to hyvä?

Paras is the superlative form of the adjective hyvä (“good”). The degrees are:

• hyvä = good
• parempi = better (comparative)
• paras = best (superlative)

So paras ainesosa = “(the) best ingredient”.

Unlike many adjectives that form the superlative with -in (e.g. nopea → nopein), hyvä is irregular and uses paras.

In English I’d say “the best ingredient” and “the garlic”. Why is there no article like “the” in the Finnish sentence?

Finnish does not have articles (no “a / an / the”). Definiteness and indefiniteness are expressed through context, word order, and sometimes case, not by separate words.

In Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipuli, context makes it clear that we mean “the best ingredient” and “garlic (in general)”. Finnish speakers automatically interpret:

• paras ainesosa ≈ “the best ingredient (in this context)”
• valkosipuli ≈ “garlic” (as a kind), not just some random garlic

So you simply leave out articles that English would require and rely on the rest of the sentence and the situation.

How would the sentence change if there were several best ingredients, like “The best ingredients in this soup are garlic and onion”?

You would put the subject and the verb in the plural:

• Tämän keiton parhaat ainesosat ovat valkosipuli ja sipuli.
  
  • parhaat ainesosat = best ingredients (plural nominative)
  • ovat = are (3rd person plural of olla)
  • valkosipuli ja sipuli = garlic and (yellow) onion

So the pattern is:

• Singular: Paras ainesosa on X. = The best ingredient is X.
• Plural: Parhaat ainesosat ovat X ja Y. = The best ingredients are X and Y.

Could I say Tässä keitossa paras ainesosa on valkosipuli instead of Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipuli? Is there a difference?

You can say both, but there is a slight nuance:

• Tämän keiton paras ainesosa on valkosipuli.

  • Literally: “This soup’s best ingredient is garlic.”
  • Uses genitive tämän keiton (“of this soup”).

• Tässä keitossa paras ainesosa on valkosipuli.

  • Literally: “In this soup, the best ingredient is garlic.”
  • Uses inessive tässä keitossa (“in this soup”).

Both are understandable and natural. The genitive version emphasizes the belonging relationship (“this soup’s ingredient”), while the inessive version emphasizes the location/contents (“in this soup”). In everyday speech, the difference is quite subtle.