# Impersonal meaning of 3rd person plural verb?



## Gavril

Päivääpä,

I've heard that the 3rd person plural form of the verb, if used *without* a preceding subject, can sometimes have an impersonal/non-specific meaning: _puhuvat_ "(some) people speak", _sanoivat_ "(some) people said", etc.

Is this usage of -_vat_ common in all spoken language, or only in certain dialects?

Also, is there any difference of meaning/tone between -_vat_ (as used in this way) and the impersonal -_taan_ form of the verb?

For example,

_Yhdistyneessä kuningaskunnassa ajavat vasemmalla puolella tietä
_vs.
_Yhdistyneessä kuningaskunnassa ajetaan vasemmalla puolella tietä
_
Since the -_taan _ending often has a 1st person plural meaning in the spoken language, could it be that -_vat_ helps to distinguish between these two meanings (1st pl. and impersonal)?

Kiitoksia paljon
(Hyvää vuoden puoliväliä)


----------



## Spongiformi

Gavril said:


> _Yhdistyneessä kuningaskunnassa ajavat vasemmalla puolella tietä
> _vs.
> _Yhdistyneessä kuningaskunnassa ajetaan vasemmalla puolella tietä
> _



I don't think I'd find myself using it like that. _"Ajetaan"_ sounds far more natural. But if somebody used it like that, I don't think there would be much difference between them.

When I personally use the construct, it's like this:

_Sanoivat kaupassa, että koko tarjouserä oli jo myyty loppuun. ~ Kaupassa sanottiin...
Päättivät kokouksessa, että ylityöt on kielletty tänä vuonna. ~ Kokouksessa päätettiin..._

In the latter case of these two, the _-vät_ choice, in my opinion, makes it more clear it was other people in the meeting who made the decision (the speaker might not have even been present). The passive form doesn't really excluse the speaker from being a part of the meeting.


----------



## sakvaka

To me, the -_vAt_ construction seems to imply more that the speaker is unsatisfied with or unhappy about the people who were in charge.

_Päättivät sitten korottaa arvonlisäveroa!
Kahvittelivat ja kokoustivat koko päivän, mutta mitään eivät saaneet aikaan.
_
And so on. Does anyone agree?


----------



## Hakro

sakvaka said:


> To me, the -_vAt_ construction seems to imply more that the speaker is unsatisfied with or unhappy about the people who were in charge.
> And so on. Does anyone agree?


I do. It often involves also some kind of scorning, I think.


----------

