Learn Hardcore Finnish: Tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet tuntuvat pieniltä, mutta ne tukevat koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta. - Such personal goals feel small, but they support the whole of language learning.

The base word is tällainen = “such, this kind of”.
tällaiset is plural nominative:
- singular nominative: tällainen
- plural nominative: tällaiset

It functions like an adjective/demonstrative that modifies henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet:

tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet
= “personal goals like this / such personal goals”.

Compare:

nämä henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet = these personal goals (refers to specific ones).
tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet = personal goals of this type (focus on type, not necessarily specific ones in front of you).

The partitive plural of tällainen would be tällaisia (“such (ones)” as an unbounded/indefinite amount), but here we need the subject in nominative plural, so it’s tällaiset.

Why are henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet in the plural nominative, and not in some other case?

Henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet is the subject of the sentence:

Tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet (subject, nominative plural)
tuntuvat (3rd person plural)
pieniltä …

So:

tavoite = a goal
plural nominative: tavoitteet
henkilökohtainen = personal
plural nominative: henkilökohtaiset (to agree with tavoitteet)

In Finnish, the subject is normally in nominative (singular or plural), and the verb agrees with it in number.

You might also meet partitive plurals like henkilökohtaisia tavoitteita, but that would typically be:

an object (e.g. Minulla ei ole henkilökohtaisia tavoitteita – “I don’t have any personal goals”), or
part of some more complex structure.

Here we have a straightforward subject, so henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet is plural nominative.

How does tuntuvat work here, and what’s the nuance compared with ovat?

Tuntuvat is the 3rd person plural form of tuntua:

tuntua = to feel, to seem, to come across (as)
tavoitteet tuntuvat pieniltä = “the goals feel small / seem small”

Key points:

It agrees with the plural subject:
- tavoitteet tuntuvat (they feel)
Its nuance is subjective impression, not an objective fact.

Compare:

Nämä tavoitteet ovat pieniä.
“These goals are small.” (describes them as objectively small)
Nämä tavoitteet tuntuvat pieniltä.
“These goals feel/seem small.” (how they seem to someone)

In your sentence, tuntuvat fits nicely because we are talking about how the goals may seem to the learner, even though in reality they are important.

Why is pieniltä in the -lta/-ltä form, and what case is that?

Pieniltä is the plural ablative of pieni (“small”):

singular: pieneltä
plural: pieniltä

The ablative case (-lta / -ltä) is used with certain verbs, and tuntua is one of them:

tuntua + lta/ltä = “to feel / seem (adjective)”
- Se tuntuu hyvältä. – “It feels good.”
- Ne tuntuvat hyviltä. – “They feel good.”
- Nämä tavoitteet tuntuvat pieniltä. – “These goals feel small.”

So the pattern is:

[subject in nominative] + tuntuu/tuntuvat + [adjective in ablative]

The idea is that something “feels like X”, and X is in the ablative. It’s not essive (-na) here; that would be a different construction.

Why is there a comma before mutta?

In standard written Finnish, you normally put a comma before coordinating conjunctions like:

ja (and)
mutta (but)
vaan (but rather)
tai (or), etc.,

when they join two clauses that each have their own finite verb.

Your sentence has two clauses:

Tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet tuntuvat pieniltä,
– verb: tuntuvat
mutta ne tukevat koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta.
– verb: tukevat

Since there are two clauses with their own verbs, a comma before mutta is required:

… tuntuvat pieniltä, mutta ne tukevat …

Why do we repeat the subject as ne in the second clause instead of just saying mutta tukevat?

Grammatically, you could omit the pronoun:

… tuntuvat pieniltä, mutta tukevat koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta.

The subject would still be understood as the same “tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet”.

However, in standard written Finnish, it is very common (and usually preferred) to repeat the pronoun when a new clause starts with a conjunction like mutta or ja, especially when:

the subject is a long noun phrase, and
you want the sentence to be clear and flowing.

So:

mutta ne tukevat …
makes the connection explicit and easy to follow.

In informal spoken Finnish, you might well hear the subject omitted:

… tuntuu pieniltä, mut silti tukee koko kielenoppimista.

There the verb often switches to generic singular (tuntuu, tukee) even for plural subjects, which is common in colloquial speech.

What is kielenoppimisen made of, and why is it in that form?

Structurally, kielenoppimisen is:

kieli = language
→ kielen = genitive singular of kieli
oppiminen = learning (noun from oppia, “to learn”)
Together: kielenoppiminen = “language learning” (compound noun)
Genitive singular of that compound: kielenoppimisen

In the phrase:

koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta

the core noun is kokonaisuus (“whole, entity”), and kielenoppimisen describes what that whole consists of:

literally: “the whole of language learning” / “the overall entity of language learning”.

In Finnish, this “X of Y” relationship is often expressed by putting Y in the genitive:

talon katto = the roof of the house (house’s roof)
kielenoppimisen kokonaisuus = the whole/entity of language learning (language-learning’s whole)

You could also write kielen oppimisen kokonaisuutta (two words) instead of the compound kielenoppimisen, but it’s very common in modern Finnish to join such combinations into a single compound noun.

What’s the difference between koko and kokonaisuus / kokonaisuutta here? Why both?

They are related but not the same:

koko = whole, entire, all (of)
– works like a determiner/quantifier.
kokonaisuus = a whole, an entirety, a system, a big-picture entity
– a regular noun.

In your phrase:

koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta

we have:

kokonaisuus (in partitive kokonaisuutta) = the overall whole/system of language learning.
koko = “the entire / the whole (of that whole)”, used for emphasis.

So it roughly means:

“the entire overall process/whole of language learning”
“the whole big-picture of language learning”.

Without koko, kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta would already mean “the entirety of language learning”, but koko reinforces the idea that you’re talking about the whole thing, not just a part.

Why is kokonaisuutta in the partitive case?

Kokonaisuutta is the partitive singular of kokonaisuus.

It’s the object of the verb tukevat:

ne tukevat [mitä?] → koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta

With the verb tukea (to support), the object is normally in the partitive:

tukea taloutta – to support the economy
tukea ystävää – to support a friend
tukea lasta – to support a child
nämä tavoitteet tukevat koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta – these goals support the whole entity of language learning

Semantically, partitive often signals that:

the object is not something you fully “use up” or “complete”,
or it’s an ongoing, unbounded, or abstract thing.

“Supporting” an abstract whole like “the whole of language learning” is naturally seen as this kind of ongoing/unbounded action, so the partitive fits well.

A form like kokonaisuuden (genitive/“total object”) is not idiomatic here with tukea; Finnish simply prefers the partitive with this verb.

Could the sentence be reordered? How flexible is the word order here?

Finnish word order is fairly flexible, especially for emphasis. Your version is the neutral one:

Tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet tuntuvat pieniltä, mutta ne tukevat koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta.

Some possible, still grammatical variations (with slightly different emphasis):

Vaikka tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet tuntuvat pieniltä, ne tukevat koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta.
– “Although such personal goals feel small, they support the whole of language learning.”
(Now the “although” relationship is highlighted.)
Ne tukevat koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta, vaikka tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet tuntuvat pieniltä.
– emphasis first on the support, then on the fact that they feel small.
Koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta tällaiset henkilökohtaiset tavoitteet tukevat, vaikka ne tuntuvat pieniltä.
– fronting the object koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta for strong emphasis (“It’s the whole of language learning that these goals support”).

The basic building blocks (subjects, verbs, cases) stay the same; moving chunks mainly changes what is being emphasized.

How might this sentence look in more colloquial spoken Finnish?

A natural colloquial version might be:

Tällaset henkilökohtaset tavoitteet tuntuu pieniltä, mut ne silti tukee koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta.

Changes compared to the standard form:

tällaiset → tällaset
– typical spoken shorthand; -iset → -aset.
henkilökohtaiset → henkilökohtaset
– same -aiset/-aiset → -aset spoken pattern.
tuntuvat → tuntuu
– verb often switches to 3rd person singular even with a plural subject in everyday speech.
mutta → mut
– short spoken form of mutta.
ne tukevat → ne tukee
– tukee is spoken 3rd person form replacing standard tukevat.
You might also hear:
- koko kielenoppimista kokonaisuutena instead of koko kielenoppimisen kokonaisuutta, or
- dropping some modifiers for brevity, depending on context.

The standard written sentence you gave is completely natural in formal or semi-formal text; the colloquial version above fits better in everyday conversation.