Breakdown of Kopioin sopimuksen kopiokoneella, mutta unohdin skannata sen.
Questions & Answers about Kopioin sopimuksen kopiokoneella, mutta unohdin skannata sen.
Kopioin is the verb kopioida (to copy) in the simple past tense (Finnish: imperfekti), 1st person singular: I copied.
Present tense would be kopioin? (No—present is kopioin only in some contexts? Actually standard present is kopioin? Not; it’s kopioin is past, present is kopioin? The present is kopioin? Correction: the present is kopioin is not correct; it’s kopioin (past) vs kopioin (looks same?)—in standard Finnish, I copy is kopioin? Wait: kopioida → kopioin (past) and kopioin (present) would clash, but Finnish avoids that by having present kopioin? No: present is kopioin for verbs like kopioida? Actually present is kopioin (I copy) and past is kopioin (I copied) can’t be same; the past is kopioin, present is kopioin? This is inconsistent.
Correct forms: kopioin = I copied (past). I copy (present) is kopioin? No, it is kopioin? Let’s use reliable conjugation: kopioida present 1sg = kopioin? Many -oida verbs: soida → soitan (not). For kopioida, present 1sg is kopioin? Actually it conjugates like sijoittaa? Hmm. Let's derive: infinitive kopioida, stem kopioi- in present: minä kopioin, sinä kopioit, hän kopioi. Past: minä kopioin, sinä kopioit, hän kopioi? That would be identical, but Finnish past for these is kopioin with i marker already in stem; indeed for some verbs, present and past 1sg can look identical, but context clarifies. Wait: is that true? For valioida? Actually kopioida past is kopioin (same as present). Hmm. In practice, context and adverbs distinguish. But this sentence also has unohdin clearly past, so overall past. We'll explain this nuance.
So answer: kopioin can be both present and past form for kopioida; here it's clearly past because of unohdin and narrative. Provide that.
Sopimuksen is sopimus (contract) in the genitive/accusative-looking -n form, used here as the total (completed) direct object of kopioida.
In Finnish, a completed, bounded action often takes a total object:
- Kopioin sopimuksen. = I copied the whole contract / got the copying done.
If the action were incomplete/ongoing or “some of it,” you’d often see the partitive:
- Kopioin sopimusta. = I was copying the contract / I copied some of the contract.
Kopiokoneella is kopiokone (photocopier) in the adessive case (-lla/-llä). One common use of the adessive is “using / with (a tool or instrument)”:
- kopiokoneella = with a photocopier / using a photocopier
The same pattern works with many tools:
- kynällä = with a pen
- autolla = by car (using a car)
Yes, depending on nuance. The most neutral “by means of” is adessive -lla.
But you might also see:
- Kopioin sopimuksen kopiokoneessa. (inessive -ssa) = literally “in the photocopier,” focusing on location (less natural unless you mean it was in the machine).
- Kopioin sopimuksen kopioimalla (sitä) kopiokoneella. = “I copied it by copying it with a photocopier” (more roundabout).
For a normal “I did it using X,” kopiokoneella is the go-to.
Finnish normally uses a comma to separate two independent clauses (each could stand as its own sentence). Here:
- Kopioin sopimuksen kopiokoneella
- mutta unohdin skannata sen
Because both parts have their own verb (kopioin / unohdin), the comma is standard.
Not really. Mutta simply links clauses and expresses contrast, like but. Finnish word order is generally flexible, but mutta doesn’t force special inversion. The clause after mutta is in normal order:
- unohdin skannata sen = I forgot to scan it
You can reorder for emphasis (Finnish allows that), but it’s not required by mutta.
Unohdin is from unohtaa (to forget) in the simple past (imperfekti), 1st person singular: I forgot.
It shows the typical past marker -i- plus the personal ending:
- unohta- + i + n → unohdin
Present would be:
- unohdan = I forget / I’m forgetting
After verbs like unohtaa (to forget), Finnish commonly uses the A-infinitive (the basic infinitive, the dictionary form):
- unohtaa tehdä = to forget to do
So: - unohdin skannata sen = I forgot to scan it
Other verbs that behave similarly include haluta (want), osata (know how), voida (can), pitää (must/should, in some constructions).
Skannata is a modern loan/loan-based verb from scan. Finnish often adapts loan verbs into an -ata/-ata type verb:
- skannata (to scan)
- printata (to print, colloquial)
In more formal contexts you might also encounter more “Finnish-style” alternatives depending on the word, but skannata is very common and widely understood.
Sen is the pronoun se (it / that) in the genitive/accusative-looking -n form, used as a total object of skannata:
- skannata sen = scan it (as a complete, finished scan)
If you meant an incomplete or ongoing scanning process, you might use the partitive:
- skannata sitä = to scan it (some of it / in progress / not bounded)
In many contexts, yes, if it’s obvious what you mean:
- Kopioin sopimuksen kopiokoneella, mutta unohdin skannata.
This can sound slightly more informal or context-dependent, but it’s possible.
Including sen makes it explicit that the forgotten action concerned the contract.
No. Finnish verb endings usually make the subject clear. Kopioin and unohdin already mean I copied and I forgot, so minä is unnecessary unless you want emphasis or contrast:
- Minä kopioin sopimuksen..., mutta hän unohti skannata sen. = I copied it..., but he/she forgot to scan it.
Yes, Finnish word order is flexible and can be changed for emphasis. For example:
- Kopioin kopiokoneella sopimuksen, mutta unohdin skannata sen. (more focus on the machine early)
- Mutta unohdin skannata sen, vaikka kopioin sopimuksen kopiokoneella. (puts contrast first; changes emphasis and uses vaikka “although”)
The original order is neutral and natural for straightforward narration.