# eniten sitä tuli



## 盲人瞎馬

> Mies vastasi tulleensa Suomeen ensin muutamaksi vuodeksi opiskelemaan ja hakeneensa sitten töitä. Töitä oli löytynytkin. "Mutta muutin lopulta pois, kun kyllästyin sellaiseen ainaiseen häirintään, mitä Suomessa sai kokea." Kun kysyin mitä hän tarkoitti, hän vastasi saaneensa osakseen rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa. Eniten *sitä *tuli humalaisilta suomalaisilta baarien ulkopuolella. Mies kun oli ihonväriltään hieman tummaihoisempi ja kotoisin Etelä-Amerikasta.



Hello. I'd like to know why sitä, the subject of that sentence, is in the partitive. 
Wouldn't it mean the same thing if the guy had written se instead?


----------



## Cold Breeze

Vitalore said:


> Wouldn't it mean the same thing if the guy had written se instead?



No. The word _sitä_ refers to the part _rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa_. That's why the word _se_ has to be in the partitive.

Actually, when I think really hard, the word would have to be _niitä_, actually. That's because the part _rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa_ is in plural, the writer has written many things. But you can understand it that way, too.


----------



## Finland

Hello!


Cold Breeze said:


> The word _sitä_ refers to the part _rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa_. That's why the word _se_ has to be in the partitive.
> 
> Actually, when I think really hard, the word would have to be _niitä_, actually. That's because the part _rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa_ is in plural, the writer has written many things. But you can understand it that way, too.



For this very reason, my interpretation would more or less automatically be that "sitä" refers to "yleistä epäluuloa", the last element in the list, and which is in singular. If the writer had referred to the whole of "rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa", I cannot see why he wouldn't have written "niitä" in plural.

HTH
S


----------



## akana

Finland said:


> Hello!
> 
> 
> For this very reason, my interpretation would more or less automatically be that "sitä" refers to "yleistä epäluuloa", the last element in the list, and which is in singular. If the writer had referred to the whole of "rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa", I cannot see why he wouldn't have written "niitä" in plural.
> 
> HTH
> S



Could the writer have also written "siitä" or "niistä," depending on which things or things is being referred to?


----------



## Finland

Hello!



akana said:


> Could the writer have also written "siitä" or "niistä," depending on which things or things is being referred to?



No, the elative would not work in Finnish.

HTH
S


----------



## Hakro

Finland said:


> For this very reason, my interpretation would more or less automatically be that "sitä" refers to "yleistä epäluuloa", the last element in the list, and which is in singular. If the writer had referred to the whole of "rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa", I cannot see why he wouldn't have written "niitä" in plural.


In my opinion, if the writer had referred to the last point only, s/he should have written "rasistisia huutoja, päällekäymisiä ja yleistä epäluuloa, jota tuli eniten humalaisilta suomalaisilta baarien ulkopuolella."

I believe that _sitä_ refers to "ainaiseen häirintään, mitä Suomessa sai kokea".

It's also obvious that the writer is not very educated in literary expressions as s/he's using _mies_ instead of _hän_, just like the sports journalists do.


----------

