087
Log inSign up

Tarvitsen rohkeutta, kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.

Tarvitsen rohkeutta, kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.
I need courage when I speak Finnish on the phone.

Breakdown of Tarvitsen rohkeutta, kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.

minä
I
tarvita
to need
puhua
to speak
suomi
Finnish
kun
when
puhelin
the phone
-ssa
on
rohkeus
the courage
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Tarvitsen rohkeutta, kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.

Why is rohkeutta used instead of rohkeus? What form is rohkeutta?

Rohkeutta is the partitive singular of rohkeus (courage).

In Finnish, the object of a verb can appear in different cases depending on meaning. With tarvita (to need), the object is almost always in the partitive, especially when:

  • the thing is abstract or uncountable (like courage, love, water), and
  • you’re talking about an indefinite amount, not a clearly limited quantity.

So:

  • Tarvitsen rohkeutta. = I need (some) courage.
    – open-ended, not a fixed, measurable amount → partitive (rohkeutta)

Using nominative rohkeus here (Tarvitsen rohkeus) would be incorrect in normal Finnish. With tarvita, just learn the pattern:

tarvita + partitive object
tarvitsen rahaa, tarvitsen aikaa, tarvitsen rohkeutta

Why is it suomea and not suomi?

Suomea is the partitive singular of suomi (Finnish (language)).

With the verb puhua (to speak), the language you speak is normally put in the partitive:

  • Puhun suomea. = I speak Finnish / I am speaking Finnish.
  • Puhutko englantia? = Do you speak English?

So puhua + [language in partitive] is the standard pattern.

Puhun suomi is wrong in standard Finnish. Nominative suomi would not be used as a direct object here.

What case is puhelimessa, and how does that match the English "on the phone"?

Puhelimessa is in the inessive case (-ssa/-ssä), which usually means “in, inside, at”.

  • puhelin = phone (nominative)
  • puhelimessa = in/at the phone (inessive)

Literally it’s something like “in the phone”, but idiomatically Finnish uses the inessive to mean “on the phone” (in the sense of being in a phone conversation):

  • Puhun puhelimessa. = I’m on the phone / I’m talking on the phone.

Other related forms (just for orientation):

  • puhelimella (adessive) – on/with the phone (using it as an instrument)
  • puhelimeen (illative) – into the phone (e.g. “huuda puhelimeen” – “shout into the phone”)

But in your sentence, puhelimessa is the normal idiom for “on the phone”.

Why is there a comma before kun in Finnish, when English often wouldn’t have one before “when”?

In standard Finnish punctuation, you normally put a comma before any finite subordinate clause, including those introduced by:

  • kun (when),
  • että (that),
  • koska (because),
  • jos (if),
  • vaikka (although), etc.

So:

  • Tarvitsen rohkeutta, kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.

Even though English often omits the comma (“I need courage when I speak Finnish on the phone”), Finnish keeps it.

If you reverse the order, you also keep a comma:

  • Kun puhun suomea puhelimessa, tarvitsen rohkeutta.
Can I move the kun-clause to the beginning: Kun puhun suomea puhelimessa, tarvitsen rohkeutta? Is there any difference?

Yes, that is completely correct:

  • Tarvitsen rohkeutta, kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.
  • Kun puhun suomea puhelimessa, tarvitsen rohkeutta.

Both mean the same in basic content.

Very slight nuance of emphasis:

  • Starting with Tarvitsen rohkeutta highlights the need for courage first.
  • Starting with Kun puhun suomea puhelimessa highlights the situation / time first.

But grammatically they are equally natural.

Why is there no minä (“I”) in the sentence?

Finnish is a “pro-drop” language: personal pronouns are often left out when they’re not needed for clarity or emphasis.

The ending -n on the verb shows 1st person singular:

  • tarvitsen = I need
  • puhun = I speak / I’m speaking

So minä is not necessary:

  • Tarvitsen rohkeutta, kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.
    = I need courage when I speak Finnish on the phone.

You would include minä mainly for emphasis or contrast:

  • Minä tarvitsen rohkeutta, mutta sinä et.
    I need courage, but you don’t.
How are tarvitsen and puhun formed from tarvita and puhua?

Two different verb types are involved.

  1. Tarvita → tarvitsen (verb type 5)

    • Dictionary form: tarvita
    • Stem used in the present: tarvitse-

    • Add personal endings:

      • minä tarvitse-n → tarvitsen
      • sinä tarvitse-t → tarvitset
      • hän tarvitse-e → tarvitsee
      • me tarvitse-mme → tarvitsemme
      • te tarvitse-tte → tarvitsette
      • he tarvitse-vat → tarvitsevat

    So tarvitsen = I need.

  2. Puhua → puhun (verb type 1)

    • Dictionary form: puhua
    • Stem: puhu-

    • Add endings:

      • minä puhu-n → puhun
      • sinä puhu-t → puhut
      • hän puhu-u → puhuu
      • me puhu-mme → puhumme
      • te puhu-tte → puhutte
      • he puhu-vat → puhuvat

    So puhun = I speak / I’m speaking.

What exactly does kun mean here? Is it “when” or “because”? How is it different from koska?

In this sentence kun is clearly temporal and means “when / whenever”:

  • …kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.
    = …when I speak Finnish on the phone.

About kun vs koska:

  • kun

    • Core meaning: when, whenever, while (time).
    • Can sometimes be used colloquially with a sense like “because”, but primary sense is temporal.

  • koska

    • As a conjunction in a clause: basically “because”.
      • Tarvitsen rohkeutta, koska puhun suomea puhelimessa.
        = I need courage because I speak Finnish on the phone.
    • As a question word: “when?” (Milloin / koska tulet?).

So in your sentence, kun = “when”, not “because”.

Could I also say Tarvitsen rohkeutta puhua suomea puhelimessa? Is that the same meaning?

Yes, that sentence is correct and very natural:

  • Tarvitsen rohkeutta puhua suomea puhelimessa.
    = I need courage to speak Finnish on the phone.

Slight nuance:

  • Tarvitsen rohkeutta, kun puhun suomea puhelimessa.
    → Focus on the time/situation: whenever I’m in that situation, I need courage.

  • Tarvitsen rohkeutta puhua suomea puhelimessa.
    → Focus on the action itself: needing courage to do that action.

In everyday use, they’re very close in meaning and often interchangeable.

Why are both rohkeutta and suomea in the partitive? Is there a common rule?

Yes. They are partitive objects, each for a slightly different reason:

  1. rohkeutta

    • Abstract, uncountable thing (courage).
    • Verbs like tarvita (to need) typically take a partitive object to express an indefinite, open-ended need.
      → Tarvitsen rohkeutta.

  2. suomea

    • Name of a language used with puhua.
    • Pattern: puhua + [language in partitive].
      → Puhun suomea, Puhun englantia, etc.

More generally, the partitive object is used for things like:

  • indefinite amounts:
    • juon vettä – I drink (some) water
  • ongoing / incomplete events:
    • luen kirjaa – I am (in the process of) reading a book
  • many abstract feelings and attitudes:
    • rakastan sinua, pelkään pimeää, tarvitsen rohkeutta
Does the Finnish present tense puhun mean “when I speak” or “when I’m speaking”? How does Finnish handle that difference?

Finnish has one present tense that covers both English:

  • simple present (I speak), and
  • present continuous/progressive (I am speaking).

So puhun can mean either, depending on context:

  • Kun puhun suomea puhelimessa…
    = When I speak Finnish on the phone… (general / habitual)
    or
    = When I’m speaking Finnish on the phone… (ongoing situation)

Finnish doesn’t mark that grammatical difference; it’s understood from context.