Huomenna minulla on kalenterimerkintä: hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan.

Breakdown of Huomenna minulla on kalenterimerkintä: hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan.

minä
I
ja
and
huomenna
tomorrow
kahdeksan
eight
kello
the clock
kalenterimerkintä
the calendar entry
hammaslääkäri
the dentist
tarkastus
the check-up
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Huomenna minulla on kalenterimerkintä: hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan.

Why is it minulla on and not minä olen to say “I have”?

Finnish does not normally use the verb olla (to be) in the same way as English “have”.

To express possession, Finnish uses a special structure:

  • [possessor in -lla/-llä] + on + [thing possessed]

So:

  • Minulla on kalenterimerkintä.
    Literally: On me is a calendar entry → “I have a calendar entry.”

If you said minä olen kalenterimerkintä, it would mean “I am a calendar entry,” which is obviously wrong here.

Other examples:

  • Sinulla on auto. – You have a car.
  • Hänellä on kiire. – He/She is in a hurry. (literally: has hurry)

What case is minulla, and what does the ending -lla mean?

Minulla is the pronoun minä (I) in the adessive case.

  • Basic form (nominative): minä – I
  • Adessive: minulla – literally “on/at me”

The -lla/-llä ending (adessive) often means:

  • physical location:
    • Pöydällä – on the table
    • Asemalla – at the station
  • possession:
    • Minulla on kirja. – I have a book.
  • “having” a feeling or state:
    • Minulla on nälkä. – I am hungry. (I have hunger.)

So in minulla on, the possessor is in the adessive, and the verb olla connects it with what is “on” that person.


Why is kalenterimerkintä in the basic form (singular, no ending)? Shouldn’t it be an object?

In the sentence Minulla on kalenterimerkintä, kalenterimerkintä (calendar entry) looks like an object from an English point of view, but in Finnish grammar it behaves more like the subject of the clause.

This kind of sentence is called an existential/possessive clause:

  • Minulla on kalenterimerkintä.
    Literally: On me is a calendar entry.

Structure:

  • Minulla – adessive (“on me”)
  • on – verb “is”
  • kalenterimerkintä – the thing that exists/“is” → subject-like role → nominative singular

Compare:

  • Pöydällä on kirja. – There is a book on the table.
    • kirja is in nominative, not in object form.

Only when you act on something (buy it, read it, see it) does it become a true object with object case marking:

  • Ostan kalenterimerkinnän. – I will buy the calendar entry. (here it is an object)

Why are there no words like “a” or “the” in kalenterimerkintä, hammaslääkäri, tarkastus?

Finnish has no articles (a, an, the). Nouns appear simply in their case and number forms, and context tells you whether the meaning is more “a” or “the”.

So:

  • kalenterimerkintä can mean: a calendar entry or the calendar entry
  • hammaslääkäri can be: a dentist or the dentist
  • tarkastus can be: an examination / check-up or the examination / the check-up

If you really need to specify:

  • se kalenterimerkintä – that/that specific calendar entry
  • tietty tarkastus – a certain/specific check-up

What exactly does kalenterimerkintä mean? Is it two words or one?

Kalenterimerkintä is one compound word made of:

  • kalenteri – calendar
  • merkintä – note, entry, marking

Together: kalenterimerkintä = calendar entry / calendar note / something entered in a calendar.

Finnish very often glues nouns together into compounds:

  • hammas (tooth) + lääkäri (doctor) → hammaslääkäri (dentist)
  • tieto (information) + kone (machine) → tietokone (computer)

Why is the sentence Huomenna minulla on kalenterimerkintä: … and not Minulla on kalenterimerkintä huomenna …? Is the word order important?

Both word orders are grammatically correct, but they have slightly different emphasis:

  1. Huomenna minulla on kalenterimerkintä: …

    • Puts huomenna (tomorrow) at the very front.
    • Emphasis: “As for tomorrow, I have a calendar entry…”
    • Very natural if you’re talking about what will happen tomorrow in general.
  2. Minulla on huomenna kalenterimerkintä: …

    • Puts minulla (I / for me) first.
    • Emphasis: “I have a calendar entry tomorrow…” (focus more on you having it rather than on “tomorrow” as a topic).

Finnish word order is relatively flexible. The first position often carries topic or emphasis, but the basic meaning remains the same here.


What does the colon (:) after kalenterimerkintä do in Finnish? Is it like in English?

Yes, it works much like in English.

  • Huomenna minulla on kalenterimerkintä: hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan.

The colon introduces:

  • an explanation of what kind of calendar entry it is, or
  • a list describing its content.

You could “expand” it like this:

  • Huomenna minulla on kalenterimerkintä, nimittäin hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan.
    (… namely, a dentist and a check-up at eight o’clock.)

In spoken Finnish, you just pause instead of saying anything like “colon”; the intonation does the job.


Why are hammaslääkäri and tarkastus just side by side with ja? Shouldn’t there be a preposition like “for” or something?

In hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan, you simply have a list of nouns connected by ja (and), just like in English:

  • “Dentist and check-up at eight.”

There is no need for a preposition here because:

  • They are simply items listed as the content of the calendar entry.
  • Finnish often uses bare nouns in lists after a colon.

If you wanted a more explicit phrase like “a check-up at the dentist”, you could say:

  • hammaslääkärintarkastus (compound: dentist-checkup)
  • tarkastus hammaslääkärillä (a check-up at the dentist – note -llä)

But the original sentence is just naming two things that the entry is about.


Could I say simply Huomenna minulla on hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan without kalenterimerkintä?

Yes, and that would sound very natural.

  • Huomenna minulla on hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan.
    = Tomorrow I have a dentist and a check-up at eight o’clock.
    (understood as “a dentist appointment and check-up”)

The version with kalenterimerkintä emphasizes that you have it written in your calendar or that you are talking specifically about a calendar entry. Without it, you are just saying you have that appointment.


What is the difference between huomenna and huominen?
  • huomenna = tomorrow as an adverb of time (answers “when?”)

    • Huomenna menen töihin. – I will go to work tomorrow.
  • huominen = tomorrow’s or the day of tomorrow as an adjective or noun

    • huominen kokous – tomorrow’s meeting
    • Huominen on tärkeä päivä. – Tomorrow is an important day.

The -na ending in huomenna is historically the essive case, and it’s very common in time expressions:

  • maanantaina – on Monday
  • kesänä – in the summer (in certain expressions)
  • jouluna – at Christmas

So:
Use huomenna when you mean “when? – tomorrow”.
Use huominen when you describe or name something related to tomorrow (tomorrow’s X).


How does kello kahdeksan express “at eight o’clock”? Why not kahdeksalta?

Both are possible, but they work a bit differently.

  1. kello kahdeksan
  • Literally: clock eight
  • Used to state the time of day quite neutrally:

    • Hammaslääkäri on kello kahdeksan. – The dentist (appointment) is at eight o’clock.
    • Juna lähtee kello kahdeksan. – The train leaves at eight.
  • Pattern: kello + number in its basic form

    • kello yksi, kello kaksi, kello kolme, kello kahdeksan
  1. kahdeksalta
  • This is the adessive form of “eight”: from/at eight (o’clock).
  • Often used to mean “starting at eight” or “from eight onward”:

    • Tapaaminen alkaa kahdeksalta. – The meeting starts at eight.
    • Olen töissä kahdeksalta. – I am at work at eight (starting then).

In your sentence:

  • … hammaslääkäri ja tarkastus kello kahdeksan.
    simply, “… dentist and check-up at eight o’clock.”

You could also say kahdeksalta there in many contexts, but kello kahdeksan is the straightforward neutral way to give the clock time.