Log inSign up

Kirjoitan viestin kynällä muistikirjaan, jotta muistan sen myöhemmin.

Kirjoitan viestin kynällä muistikirjaan, jotta muistan sen myöhemmin.
I write a message in my notebook with a pen so that I remember it later.
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Finnish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Finnish now

Questions & Answers about Kirjoitan viestin kynällä muistikirjaan, jotta muistan sen myöhemmin.

Why is viesti in the form viestin here?

Viestin is the “total object” form: it signals that the message is seen as a complete, bounded thing (I write the message / I write a message (to completion)).
In the present tense, a total singular object typically appears in the genitive-looking -n form (often taught as “genitive object”): kirjoitan viestin.

If you used the partitive viestiä, it would suggest an unbounded or ongoing action, or an unclear endpoint (e.g. Kirjoitan viestiä = I’m writing a message (in progress) / not necessarily finishing it).

So is viestin genitive or accusative?

Form-wise it looks like the genitive singular (ending -n), but functionally it behaves like the accusative (total object) in Finnish grammar. Many courses explain it as:

  • Total object (accusative) → often -n in active clauses with a personal subject: kirjoitan viestin
  • Partial object (partitive) → -a/-ä etc.: kirjoitan viestiä

Finnish doesn’t have a separate “accusative ending” for most nouns; the total-object marking often coincides with genitive or nominative forms depending on context.

Why is kynä in kynällä? What case is that?

Kynällä is adessive case (-lla/-llä). In this sentence it expresses the instrument/tool: with a pen.
So kirjoitan … kynällä = I write … using a pen.

The same case is also used for location on/at something, but with tools it’s extremely common.

Could I say kynän kanssa instead of kynällä?

Yes, but the meaning shifts a bit.

  • kynällä = natural, idiomatic “by means of a pen / with a pen (as the tool)”
  • kynän kanssa = literally “together with a pen,” which sounds heavier and is less idiomatic for “using a tool” (though still understandable)

For tools, -lla/-llä is usually the go-to choice.

Why is muistikirja in muistikirjaan?

Muistikirjaan is illative case (roughly “into”). It answers “where to?”: into the notebook.
So kirjoitan … muistikirjaan implies you’re writing the text into the notebook (i.e., in it, as the target container).

A common contrast:

  • muistikirjaan (illative) = into / in as a destination
  • muistikirjassa (inessive) = in (location)
    With writing, Finnish often treats the notebook as the “target,” so illative is very normal.
Why are there two place-ish phrases: kynällä and muistikirjaan? How do I know which is which?

They have different roles:

  • kynällä (adessive) = the instrument (what you use)
  • muistikirjaan (illative) = the destination/target (where the writing goes)

A quick check is to ask:

  • “With what?” → kynällä
  • “Into where?” → muistikirjaan
Why is there a comma before jotta?

Finnish normally uses a comma before a subordinate clause introduced by conjunctions like jotta.
So: … muistikirjaan, jotta … is standard punctuation.

What does jotta do грамmatically, and how is it different from että?

jotta introduces a purpose clause: “in order that / so that.” It answers “for what purpose?”
että is more neutral and often introduces content/that-clauses (what someone says/thinks, etc.).

In your sentence, the idea is purpose: you write the message for the purpose of remembering it later, so jotta fits.

Why is it jotta muistan (present) and not something like a conditional?

After jotta, Finnish commonly uses the present tense to express purpose, even when English might use so that I will remember.
So jotta muistan is natural Finnish: literally “so that I remember.”

You can sometimes see conditional in purpose-like contexts (especially if it’s more hypothetical/polite), but the straightforward, neutral choice here is present indicative.

Why is it muistan sen and not muistan sitä?

Same object logic as earlier:

  • muistan sen = total object → “I remember it (as a whole/fully)”
  • muistan sitä = partitive → can suggest an incomplete/ongoing remembering, or “I remember (some of) it / I’m trying to remember it / I keep remembering it”

With a concrete item like the message, sen is the typical choice.

Do I need to include minä (I) in this sentence?

No. Finnish usually drops the subject pronoun because the verb ending already shows the person:

  • Kirjoitan … already means I write / I’m writing.

You could add minä for emphasis or contrast (e.g. “I (not someone else) am writing…”), but the neutral version omits it.

Does Kirjoitan mean “I write,” “I am writing,” or “I will write”?

All of those can be possible depending on context, because Finnish present tense covers:

  • a habitual/general present: I write
  • an action happening now: I am writing
  • a near-future or planned action: I will write

In an isolated sentence like this, learners often interpret it as I am writing or I write (now), but context decides.

What does myöhemmin mean exactly, and could it be replaced with something else?

myöhemmin is an adverb meaning later / afterwards. It’s neutral and very common.

Related options (with slightly different feel):

  • myöhemmin = later (general)
  • jälkeenpäin = afterwards / later on (often “in hindsight” or after the fact)
  • myöhempänä (rare/marked) = at a later time (more specific/structural)

Here myöhemmin is the most natural choice.