Yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa koko koetta.

A single mistake does not ruin the whole exam.

Breakdown of Yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa koko koetta.

• ei: not
• koko: whole
• virhe: the mistake
• koe: the exam
• pilata: to ruin
• yksittäinen: individual

Questions & Answers about Yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa koko koetta.

What is the basic word-by-word breakdown and structure of Yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa koko koetta?

The sentence is:

• yksittäinen – a single, individual (adjective, nominative singular)
• virhe – mistake, error (noun, nominative singular; the subject)
• ei – the negative verb does not in 3rd person singular
• pilaa – verb spoils, ruins in the special “connegative” form used with ei
• koko – whole, entire (indeclinable adjective meaning the whole…)
• koetta – exam, test in the partitive singular (object)

Grammar roles:

• Yksittäinen virhe = subject (“a single mistake”)
• ei pilaa = negated verb phrase (“does not spoil”)
• koko koetta = object (“the whole exam”), in partitive because of negation

Why is virhe in the basic form (virhe) and not something like virheen or virhettä?

Virhe is the subject of the sentence, and subjects in Finnish are normally in the nominative case, which is the basic dictionary form.

• nominative: virhe – “a mistake” (as subject)
• genitive: virheen – “of a mistake”
• partitive: virhettä – “(some) mistake” in a partitive sense

So:

• Yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa…
  “A single mistake does not spoil…”

If you changed the case, the role would change:

• Yksittäisen virheen takia koe epäonnistui.
  “Because of a single mistake, the exam failed.”
  (virheen = genitive, “of a single mistake”)

What exactly does yksittäinen mean, and how is it different from just yksi?

yksittäinen is an adjective meaning “single, individual, isolated”. It emphasizes that we are talking about one item considered on its own, not as part of a pattern.

• yksi virhe – “one mistake” (purely numeric: the number 1)
• yksittäinen virhe – “a single / isolated mistake” (emphasizes that it’s just one, on its own)

In English, both often translate as “a single mistake”, but yksittäinen adds a nuance like “just an isolated one, not many”.

Grammatically, yksittäinen:

• is an adjective
• agrees with the noun in number and case:
  • yksittäinen virhe (nom. sg.)
  • yksittäisen virheen (gen. sg.)
  • yksittäisiä virheitä (part. pl.), etc.

What is going on with ei pilaa? Why are there two words for “does not spoil”?

Finnish negation uses a separate negative verb plus the main verb in a special form:

• ei – the negative verb, conjugated for person and number
• pilaa – the main verb in the connegative form (no personal ending)

For 3rd person singular:

• affirmative: hän pilaa – “he/she spoils”
• negative: hän ei pilaa – “he/she does not spoil”

In your sentence:

• subject: (yksittäinen virhe) → 3rd person singular
• negative verb: ei (3rd person singular)
• connegative main verb: pilaa

So ei pilaa = “does not spoil / doesn’t ruin”.

Why is koetta in that form? What case is it, and what’s the base word?

The base word is koe – “exam, test”.

koetta is the partitive singular of koe.

• nominative: koe – “(an) exam”
• genitive: kokeen – “of the exam / the exam” (as total object)
• partitive: koetta – “(the) exam” in partitive role

The form koetta is used here because:

1. It’s the object of the verb pilaa, and
2. The clause is negative (ei pilaa).

In Finnish, a negated sentence normally puts the object in the partitive case:

• Hän pilaa kokeen. – “He/she ruins the exam.” (affirmative → kokeen, gen./acc.)
• Hän ei pilaa koetta. – “He/she doesn’t ruin the exam.” (negative → koetta, partitive)

Your sentence follows the same rule.

Why is the object partitive in a negative sentence? Is that a rule?

Yes, this is a central rule in Finnish:

In a negative clause, the object is usually in the partitive.

Examples:

• Luen kirjan. – “I (will) read the book (completely).” → kirjan (gen./acc.)
• En lue kirjaa. – “I’m not reading the book / I won’t read the book.” → kirjaa (part.)

In your sentence:

• Underlying positive sentence: Yksittäinen virhe pilaa koko kokeen.
  “A single mistake spoils the whole exam.” → kokeen (total object)
• Negative: Yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa koko koetta.
  “A single mistake does not spoil the whole exam.” → koetta (partitive object)

So the partitive koetta mainly comes from the negation, not from a “partial” meaning of the object.

What does koko mean exactly, and does it change its form?

koko means “whole, entire”.

• koko koe – “the whole exam”
• koko kirja – “the whole book”
• koko päivä – “the whole day”

Key points about koko:

• It is indeclinable: it usually stays as “koko”.

• The noun after it carries the case ending:

  • nominative: koko koe – “the whole exam”
  • genitive/accusative: koko kokeen – “the whole exam” as total object
  • partitive: koko koetta – “the whole exam” as partitive object

So the change is on koe → koetta / kokeen, not on koko itself.

What is the difference in meaning between koko kokeen and koko koetta?

Both contain koko = “whole”, but the case of koe changes the grammatical role:

• koko kokeen – genitive/accusative: total object

  • Yksittäinen virhe pilaa koko kokeen.
    “A single mistake spoils the whole exam.”
    → The exam is fully spoiled (affirmative).

• koko koetta – partitive: object in a negative clause

  • Yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa koko koetta.
    “A single mistake does not spoil the whole exam.”
    → Negation forces the object to partitive.

The primary difference here is affirmative vs. negative grammar, not a subtle semantic nuance. In practice:

• koko kokeen goes with affirmative pilaa
• koko koetta goes with negative ei pilaa

Could the word order be different, like Koko koetta yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa? Is that still correct?

Yes, Finnish allows fairly flexible word order. The version:

• Koko koetta yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa.

is grammatically correct. The main difference is emphasis:

• Yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa koko koetta.
  Neutral: “A single mistake doesn’t spoil the whole exam.”
• Koko koetta yksittäinen virhe ei pilaa.
  Emphasizes koko koetta (“the whole exam”) – something like:
  “The whole exam, a single mistake won’t spoil.”

The basic grammatical relations (subject, verb, object) stay the same, but fronting an element (putting it first) tends to highlight or contrast it.

How is pilaa formed from the basic verb? What is the dictionary form?

The dictionary (infinitive) form is pilata – “to spoil, to ruin”.

From pilata, present tense 3rd person singular:

• stem: pila-
• 3rd person sg. ending: -a → pilaa
  • Hän pilaa kokeen. – “He/she spoils the exam.”

In negative sentences, Finnish uses the connegative verb form, which for this tense looks identical to the 3rd person singular form:

• Hän ei pilaa koetta. – “He/she does not spoil the exam.”

So pilaa here is the present tense connegative form paired with ei.

There are no words for “a” or “the” in the Finnish sentence. How do we know it means “A single mistake” and “the whole exam”?

Finnish has no articles like English a/an or the. Definiteness and indefiniteness are understood from:

• context
• word choice (e.g. yksittäinen suggests “a single”)
• whether something is already known or specific

In your sentence:

• yksittäinen virhe naturally reads as “a single mistake” (new, non-specific).
• koko koe / koko koetta typically refers to a specific, known exam in context, which in English becomes “the whole exam”.

So the English translation supplies “a” and “the” because English requires them, but Finnish expresses that information implicitly.