Learn Hardcore Finnish: Mä myönnän, etten aina muista katsoa taakse, jos pyöräilijä tulee hiljaa ohi. - I admit that I don’t always remember to look back if a cyclist quietly comes past.

minä = the standard written form, neutral and used in formal writing and careful speech.
mä = the common spoken/colloquial form, especially in southern/urban Finnish (Helsinki area).

In everyday conversation, mä myönnän is completely natural. In a formal text you’d more likely see Minä myönnän or often just Myönnän (dropping the pronoun, since the verb ending already shows the person).

What does myönnän mean exactly, and how is it formed?

myönnän means I admit.

Dictionary form (infinitive): myöntää = to admit, to concede, to grant.
Stem: myönnä-
Person ending: -n for 1st person singular.

So:

myönnä-
- n → myönnän = I admit.

It’s a normal present tense verb. The sentence is talking about a general truth/habit, not just a one-time event, but Finnish still uses the plain present tense for that.

What exactly is etten, and why is it written as one word?

etten is a combination of:

että = that (subordinating conjunction)
en = I don’t (1st person singular negative verb)

So että + en → etten.

It introduces a subordinate clause and carries the negative for the verb:

Mä myönnän, etten aina muista…
= I admit that I don’t always remember…

You can also write it as two words: että en. Both are grammatically correct in standard Finnish, but in flowing written language etten is very common and feels smoother.

Why is it etten aina muista and not something like aina en muista?

Both are possible, but they have slightly different emphasis.

etten aina muista
Literal structure: that-I-don’t always remember
Natural English: that I don’t always remember
The focus is on “not always”; it’s a fairly neutral way to say sometimes I forget.
että aina en muista
More literally: that always I don’t remember
This sounds more marked/emphatic, like stressing the contrast: that I don’t always remember (even though maybe I should / you might expect I would).

In everyday language, etten aina muista is the most natural way to express I don’t always remember.

Why is it muista katsoa and not something like muistan katsomaan or muistan katsomista?

The structure muistaa + verb in basic form is standard when muistaa means to remember to do something.

Pattern:

muistaa
- 1st infinitive (dictionary form)
  → muistaa tehdä = to remember to do

So:

muistan katsoa = I remember to look
en muista katsoa = I don’t remember to look

Using katsomaan or katsomista would change the meaning or be unnatural here:

katsomaan (illative of 3rd infinitive) is used with verbs of movement/purpose:
Menin katsomaan = I went to watch/see.
katsomista (partitive of 4th infinitive) is more nominal/abstract:
En pidä katsomisesta = I don’t like watching.

So for remember to look, you want muistaa + katsoa.

What does taakse mean exactly, and what case is it in?

taakse means (to) behind, backwards, towards the back. It expresses direction.

It’s related to the noun taka = back (the rear side of something) and is in a directional form:

taka (base idea: back)
taakse = to the back, behind (direction, movement towards that place)

A simple comparison:

takana = behind (location, where?)
e.g. Auto on talon takana. = The car is behind the house.
taakse = behind, to the back (direction, where to?)
e.g. Katso taakse. = Look behind (you).

In the sentence, katsoa taakse = look behind (me) / look back.

Why isn’t me / my expressed, like taakseni or minun taakseni?

In Finnish it’s very common to omit this kind of “obvious” possessor when it’s clear from context.

Literally, you could say:

muistan katsoa taakseni = remember to look behind me
muistan katsoa minun taakseni (possible but clunky; possessive suffix is usually enough)

But in a sentence about your own actions (Mä myönnän…), katsoa taakse is naturally understood as look behind myself / look behind me. No explicit minun or -ni is needed.

So the English needs behind me, but Finnish can comfortably just say taakse.

How does jos work here? Is it more like if or when?

jos literally means if, and that’s the core meaning here.

jos pyöräilijä tulee hiljaa ohi
= if a cyclist quietly comes past

However, in everyday Finnish, jos can sometimes have a flavor a bit like English when in talking about repeated situations or typical conditions. In this sentence, it’s about a typical kind of situation: if/when a cyclist comes past quietly.

If you used kun instead:

…kun pyöräilijä tulee hiljaa ohi
This leans more toward when a cyclist comes past quietly (as a more expected/typical event).

Both might be understandable, but jos fits the slightly more hypothetical if that happens nuance.

What does pyöräilijä literally mean, and what form is it in?

pyöräilijä means cyclist.

It’s built from:

pyöräillä = to cycle
-ijä / -jä = a person who does that action

So pyöräilijä = a person who cycles → a cyclist.

In the sentence it’s in the nominative singular (the basic subject form):

pyöräilijä tulee… = a cyclist comes…

Why is it tulee hiljaa ohi instead of something like menee or ajaa ohi?

Several points:

tulee
- tulla = to come.
- pyöräilijä tulee ohi = the cyclist comes past / comes by.
- Using tulla with ohi focuses on the event of passing by from the speaker’s perspective.
You could also say:
- pyöräilijä ajaa ohi = the cyclist rides past (more literally about riding/driving).
ohi
- Means past, by (and beyond the point).
- Common combinations: ajaa ohi (drive past), kävellä ohi (walk past), mennä ohi (go past), tulla ohi (come past).
hiljaa
- Adverb = quietly, slowly/softly.
- tulee hiljaa ohi = comes quietly past; the idea is that the cyclist passes without making much noise, so you might not notice them.

Overall, pyöräilijä tulee hiljaa ohi emphasizes “a cyclist quietly passes by (me).”

Why is the present tense used? In English we might say “if a cyclist comes” as a general case; is Finnish doing the same?

Yes. Finnish present tense is used both for:

real present time:
Pyöräilijä tulee ohi nyt. = A cyclist is coming past now.
general truths / repeated situations / habits:
Jos pyöräilijä tulee hiljaa ohi… = If a cyclist (ever) comes quietly past…

So here, even though it’s not about a single specific moment, the present tense expresses a typical, repeated situation, just like English if a cyclist comes quietly past.