When the personal pronouns are used with the verb, it is commoner, particularly in speaking, to put them in the accusative ending in t, e.g. minut, sinut, hänet nähdään, is more usual than minä, sinä, hän nähdään. But the form with the nominative is not only grammatically correct, but found in writing, especially in the Bible, e.g. Rom. viii. 36, Sinun tähtes me kuoletetaan yli päivää: me pidetään niinkuin teurastettavat lampaat, for thy sake we are killed all the day long: we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Similarly 2 Cor. xi. 36, Kuka pahoitetaan ja en minä pala? Who is offended and I burn not. Sillä he ravitaan, for they shall be filled, S. Matt. v. 6. Että te heiltä nähtäisiin, that ye may be seen of them, S. Matt. vi. 1[15].
The conjugation of a passive form contains not only the strictly impersonal forms, like luetaan, people read, luettiin, people did read, but also compound tenses formed with the past passive participle which stand grammatically upon a different footing. For the participle in question is a simple adjective (or substantive), and such phrases as kirja on luettu, kirjat ovat luetut are exactly analogous to kirja on hyvä and kirjat ovat hyvät. In some cases, however, double constructions are possible: one can say either kirjat eivät ole löydetyt, the books have not been found, which is a simple adjectival construction; or kirjoja ei ole löydetty, in which the construction with the participle is assimilated to that with the other forms of the verb. If a participle of olla is employed in a compound tense in this construction it must be the passive participle. Kirjaa ei oltu löydetty, the book was not found.
Infinitives.
The five infinitives of the Finnish verb play a great part in the syntax, and are often used to express the subordinate sentences (temporal, final, etc.) of other languages. The simplest way to understand their many uses is to recollect that they are equivalent to an English verbal ending in ing, such as cutting. Now a word like this is a noun, but it can also have an object, e.g. cutting the wood, and it can be also combined with a substantive or pronoun indicating the agent, e.g. my cutting the wood or the man’s cutting the wood. Such expressions as my cutting the wood is unavoidable, during my cutting the wood, or without my cutting the wood are intelligible in English, though not idiomatic; but they are the literal translation of the Finnish idiom. In other words, the infinitive is a noun capable of declension in certain cases and of being combined with a genitive or personal affix to mark the agent. As it is also a verbal noun, it is likewise capable of being combined with a second substantive to mark the object of the action. Thus nähdessänsä minun päiväni is literally ‘in his seeing my day,’ that is when he saw. The use of the fourth infinitive is slightly different. In the phrase Minun on tämä kirja lukeminen, I should read this book, it will be observed that the object is in the nominative. This is because the literal meaning seems to be, This book is a reading for me, though it must be admitted that the negative form Ei ole minun tätä kirjaa lukemista does not lend itself to this explanation, and can only be explained by supposing it is due to analogy. The object of the other infinitives is mostly put in the partitive, partly perhaps because, as the genitive and accusative are identical in form in the singular, the subject and object might be confused if the latter were in the accusative. The object is, however, often put in the nominative. The rule generally given is that this is only right if the infinitive depends on an imperative or a verb implying necessity, as minun pitää ostaman hevonen, I must buy a horse. But this rule is not always observed in the Kalevala, or even in modern books. E.g. Kal. xi. 127, Onko saarella sioa minun leikki lyöäkseni?
Infinitive I.
The first infinitive has two forms, one with the translative termination and always used with a prominal suffix; the other with no case termination and used without a pronominal suffix.
A. The longer form with the suffix is used to express the purpose of the action of the main verb, and is rendered in English by in order to or by a simple infinitive. Antakaa vettä juodakseni, give me water to drink. This is of course literally give me water for my drinking, and is exactly analogous to the use of the same case of a noun in the sentence, Juon vettä terveydekseni, I drink water for my health. It is important to notice that the pronominal suffix always indicates the subject of the action denoted by the infinitive, and not the object, though in translation it is often necessary to invert the sentence. For instance in S. John vii. 19 and 20 the questions ‘Why go ye about to kill me? Who goeth about to kill thee?’ are rendered Miksi te etsitte minua tappaaksenne? Kuka sinua etsii tapaaksensa? literally Why seek ye me for your killing? Who seeks thee for his killing? Me pyysimme venettä soutaaksemme, we asked for a boat to row in. Menkäämme tuolle vuorelle katsellaksemme järveä, let us go up that hill to have a view of the lake. Tahdon lukea laskun nähdäkseni onko kaikki oikein, I want to read the bill to see if everything is right. Oli paljon matkustellut ulkomailla täydentääkseen sivistystään, he had travelled much abroad to complete his education. The distinction between the uses of the longer and shorter forms of the infinitive is not always observed in dialects and poetry. Thus the longer form is used with impersonal verbs, e.g. Sinun täytyy mennäksesi, you must go, where mennä would now be used. So too Älä pelkää ottaaksesi, fear not to take. Kal. i. 165, Wilu tääll’ on ollakseni, Waiva wärjätelläkseni, Aalloissa asuakseni, Weessä wierielläkseni, it is cold for me to be here, painful to stay, to dwell in the waves, to roll in the water. Cf. Kal. xliii. 401, and xvii. 507.
B. The fact that the last syllable of the shorter form of the first infinitive is closed shows that it has undoubtedly lost a letter or syllable. It is probable therefore that the short form is not really the nominative from which the translative is derived, but a translative which has lost its termination. Cf. luo, taa for luoksi, taaksi. The employment of the form is also agreeable to its origin, for its manifold uses, as given in grammars, may be summed up in the formula that it defines the meaning of verbs, adjectives, and substantives; that is to say, it expresses that towards which an action tends, which is one of the uses of the translative (p. [159]). Such phrases as voin, tahdon, tiedän lukea, I can read, wish to read, or know how to read might be expressed as I have power, will, or knowledge for reading.
In some cases the use of the translative and this infinitive are obviously analogous. Ei sovi suuttua, it is not fitting to be angry. Hän sopii sotamieheksi, he is fit for a soldier. Ei minun kelpaa juoda vettä, it does not suit me to drink water, can be also expressed in the form, Vesi ei kelpaa minulle juotavaksi (or juomaksi).
The short form of this infinitive never takes suffixes in ordinary Finnish, though it does occasionally in the Kalevala; e.g. the first lines Mieleni minun tekevi, Aivoni ajattelevi, Lähteäni laulamahan, Saa’ani sanelemahan. Onko saarella sioa ... Minun laulut laulellani, is there a place on the island for me to sing my song (Kal. xxix. 137). Cf. Onpa saarella sioa ... Sinun laulut laulellasi (ib. 147).