Log inSign up

Ellei vesi ole puhdasta, en juo sitä.

Ellei vesi ole puhdasta, en juo sitä.
Unless the water is clean, I won’t drink it.

Breakdown of Ellei vesi ole puhdasta, en juo sitä.

minä
I
olla
to be
puhdas
clean
juoda
to drink
se
it
ei
not
ellei
unless
vesi
water
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Ellei vesi ole puhdasta, en juo sitä.

What does ellei mean, and how is it formed?

Ellei is a fused form of ellei = elle + ei, meaning unless / if not.

  • elle is an older/rare standalone conditional marker (you mostly meet it in ellei)
  • ei is the negative word
    So Ellei vesi ole puhdasta = Unless the water is clean / If the water isn’t clean.
Is ellei the same as jos ei? When would I use one vs the other?

They’re very close:

  • jos ei = plain if not
  • ellei = typically unless, often slightly more formal or “set-phrase-like”

In many contexts you can swap them with little change:

  • Ellei vesi ole puhdasta, en juo sitä.
  • Jos vesi ei ole puhdasta, en juo sitä.

But ellei naturally matches English unless.

Why is it vesi ole and not vesi ei ole in the first clause?

Because the negative is already inside ellei.
So you don’t add another ei:

  • ✅ Ellei vesi ole puhdasta…
  • ❌ Ellei vesi ei ole puhdasta… (double negation; not standard)

If you use jos, then you need the separate negative:

  • Jos vesi ei ole puhdasta…
Why is the verb ole (not on)?

Ole is the connegative form used with negation and certain negative-like constructions.
Compare:

  • Positive: vesi on puhdasta / puhdas
  • Negative: vesi ei ole puhdasta

Since ellei contains negation, it triggers the same pattern: ole, not on.

Why is puhdasta in the partitive case?

With olla (“to be”), the complement (predicate) can be:

  • nominative: often for “a complete/definite state”
    • Vesi on puhdas. = The water is (completely) clean.
  • partitive: often for an open-ended, variable, or “somewhat/in general” quality
    • Vesi on puhdasta. ≈ The water is clean (as a substance / generally clean).

In practice, for substances like water, partitive (puhdasta) is very common and natural.

Could I also say Ellei vesi ole puhdas (nominative) instead of puhdasta?

Yes, and it’s grammatical, but it can sound a bit different.

  • puhdas can feel more like “the water (this specific water) is clean” as a clear yes/no property.
  • puhdasta is often preferred with mass nouns (water, air, milk) and can sound more idiomatic.

So:

  • Ellei vesi ole puhdasta… = very natural for “clean water” as a substance
  • Ellei vesi ole puhdas… = also possible, slightly more categorical
Why is it en juo and not en juon?

Finnish negation uses a negative auxiliary (en/et/ei/emme/ette/eivät) + the connegative form of the main verb.

  • Positive: minä juon = I drink
  • Negative: minä en juo = I don’t drink

So the main verb drops its personal ending in negatives.

Why is the object sitä (partitive) and not sen (genitive) or se (nominative)?

With many verbs, Finnish object case signals whether the action is seen as complete or incomplete/ongoing.

  • juoda (“to drink”) commonly takes the partitive when you mean “drink (some/any of it)” or “not necessarily all.”
    • Juon sitä. = I drink some of it.
    • En juo sitä. = I don’t drink it (at all).
      In negative sentences, the object is very often partitive:
  • En juo sitä. (partitive)

If you mean drinking it up completely, you might use a total object (depending on context):

  • Juon sen. = I will drink it (all / finish it).
    But in the negative here, sitä is the expected choice.
What does sitä refer to, and why is the pronoun included?

sitä = it (partitive of se) and it refers back to vesi (the water).
You include it because Finnish normally marks the object explicitly:

  • en juo alone can sound incomplete unless the object is clear from context.
  • en juo sitä is a complete, natural sentence.

In context, you can drop it if it’s very obvious, but the full version is standard.

Why is there a comma, and can I swap the clause order?

The comma separates the conditional clause from the main clause:

  • Ellei vesi ole puhdasta, en juo sitä.

You can swap the order:

  • En juo sitä, ellei vesi ole puhdasta.

Both are correct; the first is a common “condition first” structure.

Why isn’t minä (“I”) used? Is it optional?

Yes, it’s optional. The form en already shows 1st person singular, so minä is usually omitted unless you want emphasis or contrast:

  • Neutral: en juo sitä
  • Emphatic/contrastive: minä en juo sitä (implying “I (but someone else might) don’t drink it”)