Jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona, perheeni on joululomalla, emmekä mene kouluun emmekä töihin.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona, perheeni on joululomalla, emmekä mene kouluun emmekä töihin.

Why is it Jouluna and not just joulu? What does the -na ending mean here?

Jouluna is the essive case of joulu (Christmas). The essive ending is -na / -nä.

In time expressions, the essive often means “at / on (during)” a certain time:

  • jouluna = at Christmas
  • kesällä (adessive) and kesänä (essive) both can be used, but jouluna, syntymäpäivänä, maanantaina etc. are very common for “on X (day/occasion)”.

So Jouluna, ... literally: At Christmas, ...

You rarely use plain joulu alone to mean “at Christmas”; you normally put it in a case like jouluna, joulunaikaan, etc.

What is the difference between joulu and jouluaatto, and why do we get jouluaattona?
  • joulu = Christmas (the whole holiday)
  • jouluaatto = Christmas Eve (literally “Christmas Eve/Christmas’s eve”)

Jouluaattona is jouluaatto in the essive case:

  • jouluaattojouluaattona = on Christmas Eve

So the beginning of the sentence says:

  • Jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona, ...
    = At Christmas, especially on Christmas Eve, ...

Both jouluna and jouluaattona are temporal essive forms (“on / at [that time]”).

What exactly does varsinkin do here, and where can it go in the sentence?

Varsinkin means “especially, particularly”.

In the sentence:

  • Jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona, ...
    varsinkin emphasizes jouluaattona, so it means at Christmas, *especially on Christmas Eve*.

Position:

  • Very often varsinkin appears right before the thing it emphasizes:
    • varsinkin jouluaattona
    • varsinkin lapset (especially the children)

Moving it far away from what it modifies usually sounds odd or unclear. Here the commas just set off the phrase as a kind of side remark: “At Christmas – especially on Christmas Eve – my family is on Christmas vacation …”

Why is it perheeni and not minun perhe or minun perheeni?

Perheeni is perhe (family) + the possessive suffix -ni (my).

  • perhe = family
  • perheeni = my family

Finnish has two ways to show possession:

  1. Possessive pronoun only (colloquial, common in speech and informal writing)

    • minun perhe = my family
  2. Possessive suffix (standard, neutral, especially in writing)

    • perheeni = my family
  3. Both together (more emphatic, or sometimes slightly formal/old-fashioned in everyday style)

    • minun perheeni = my family (and not someone else’s)

In standard written Finnish, perheeni alone is fully normal and often preferred.

Why is the verb on (third-person singular) used with perheeni? Isn’t “my family” many people?

In Finnish, perhe is a singular noun, and verb agreement is purely grammatical, not semantic.

  • perheeni on = my family is

This is actually just like English:

  • English: My family *is on vacation.* (not “are” in standard American English; British English varies)
  • Finnish: Perheeni on joululomalla.

Even though the family has multiple members, grammatically perheeni is one unit, so you use on.

What does joululomalla mean, and why does it end in -lla?

Joululomalla is:

  • joulu = Christmas
  • loma = holiday, vacation
  • joululoma = Christmas vacation
  • joululomalla = on (Christmas) vacation

The ending -lla / -llä is the adessive case, often used to express:

  • location: on / at / by something
  • certain “states” or situations

With olla lomalla (“to be on vacation”), the pattern is:

  • olla lomalla = to be on vacation
  • olla joululomalla = to be on Christmas vacation

So perheeni on joululomalla = my family is on Christmas vacation.

What is the difference between emme and emmekä in emme mene kouluun emmekä töihin?

Both are forms of the negative verb for we (me):

  • emme = we do not
  • emmekä = and we do not / nor do we

-kä / -kään is a clitic that adds the idea of “and also not / neither / either” and connects to something previous.

In this sentence:

  • emme mene kouluun = we do not go to school
  • emmekä töihin = and we do not (go) to work either

So emmekä links a second negative part to the first one, like:

  • we don’t go to school, and we don’t go to work either
  • or: we don’t go to school, *nor to work.*

The verb mene is dropped in the second part because it’s understood (we don’t go to work).

Why is there no me pronoun? Why not me emme mene kouluun?

In Finnish, the verb ending already shows the person:

  • emme = we do not (the -mme part is “we”)

Because of that, subject pronouns are often omitted when they’re not needed for emphasis or clarity.

  • emme mene kouluun = we don’t go to school
  • me emme mene kouluun = we don’t go to school (but with emphasis on “we”)

So in the sentence:

  • ... perheeni on joululomalla, emmekä mene kouluun emmekä töihin.
    the me is already contained in emme / emmekä, and leaving out me sounds perfectly natural.
Why is it mennä kouluun but mennä töihin? What’s the difference between kouluun / koulussa and töihin / töissä?

Both kouluun and töihin are directions: “to school” and “to work”.

  • koulu = school

    • kouluun (illative singular) = to school
    • koulussa (inessive singular) = at school / in school
  • työ = work, job

    • töihin (illative plural) = to work (to one’s job)
    • töissä (inessive plural) = at work

Set expressions:

  • mennä kouluun = to go to school
  • olla koulussa = to be at school

  • mennä töihin = to go to work
  • olla töissä = to be at work

So the sentence uses the illative (kouluun, töihin) because it describes going to those places. Töihin / töissä are historically plural forms, but in modern Finnish they’re just the standard way to say “to work / at work”.

Do we really need to repeat emmekä? Could we say something like emme mene kouluun tai töihin?

You can say:

  • emme mene kouluun tai töihin

but there’s a nuance difference:

  • emme mene kouluun tai töihin
    • literally “we don’t go to school or work”
    • grammatically fine, usually interpreted as neither of those
  • emme mene kouluun emmekä töihin
    • explicitly “we don’t go to school, and we don’t go to work either
    • feels more parallel and clear
    • fits nicely with negative + -kä pattern (en / et / ei / emme / ette / eivät
      • -kä/-kään)

The sentence chosen (emme … emmekä …) strongly highlights both negatives as separate but parallel: we don’t go to school, and we don’t go to work either.

How flexible is the word order? Could we say Perheeni on joululomalla jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona?

Finnish word order is fairly flexible, especially for adverbials (time, place, manner). You can say:

  • Perheeni on joululomalla jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona.

Both:

  • Jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona, perheeni on joululomalla ...
  • Perheeni on joululomalla jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona ...

are grammatically correct.

Differences are mostly about emphasis and style:

  • Starting with Jouluna puts time first, like English “At Christmas, …”
  • Starting with Perheeni puts “my family” first, more like “My family is on Christmas vacation at Christmas, especially on Christmas Eve …”

Finnish often puts known or background information earlier and new or emphasized information later, but both orders are natural here.

Why are there commas around varsinkin jouluaattona, and why is there a comma before emmekä?
  1. Commas around “varsinkin jouluaattona”

    • Jouluna, varsinkin jouluaattona, ...
      The phrase varsinkin jouluaattona is like a parenthetical comment:
      At Christmas, *especially on Christmas Eve, my family is on holiday…*
      In Finnish, such inserted clarifications are usually separated by commas, just like in English.
  2. Comma before “emmekä”

    • ..., perheeni on joululomalla, emmekä mene kouluun emmekä töihin.
      Here emmekä mene kouluun ... starts a new clause, joined with and (not). In Finnish, you normally put a comma before a new independent clause introduced by a conjunction such as ja, mutta, tai, sekä, vaan, eikä, emmekä, etc.

So the commas are following regular Finnish punctuation rules for parenthetical phrases and coordinated clauses.