[10] The closing of the root and omission or weakening of t in the first and second forms of the infinitive is no doubt due to the extremely frequent use of the forms with suffixes. Thus saadakseni from saata is grammatically correct, as is also lukeakseni from luketa, according to the euphonic rules of the Kalevala or Old Karelian dialect. Such forms as saada are probably not nominatives, but shortened translatives.
[11] The first infinitive is occasionally found in the Bible, e.g. Psalm xliv. 12 Sinä annat meitä syötää niinkuin lampaita.
[12] The participle is nousnut or noussut.
[13] These forms are ably discussed by Mr. Setälä, in vol. II of the Journal de la Société Finne-Ugrienne, p. 29 ff. He endeavours to prove [and it seems to me with success] that k is a suffix of the present tense, and se a pronominal affix.
[14] Cf. kaikkialla, toisialla, kuusialla. Some consider these forms as compounds of the pronominal stem with the word ala, so that muualla stands for muu + ala + lla.
[15] It is noticeable that peasants frequently use the passive with the pronoun of the first person plural, as if it were a personal form. Jokohan mekin tuo lehmä myötäisiin? Shall we not sell this cow too?
[16] Analogy has no doubt played a great part in the development of these constructions, but they clearly have their origin in the use of the participle as a substantive, just like the infinitive. Compare Minä toivon saada rahoja with Minä luulen saavani rahoja and Miehet nayttävät tulevan with Miehet taitavat tulla. Compare such Turkish constructions as كلديكمى بلدكز geldiyimi bildiniz, you knew I had come.
[17] Vasiten or vaseten occurs in dialects.
[18] I should say that in this account I am deeply indebted to the Finnish introduction to the edition of the Kalevala, published in 1887 at Helsingfors.
[19] The word seems to imply low-lying marshy places.