# imperfect



## 盲人瞎馬

Hello, I'm having trouble forming the imperfect in Finnish.
I read somewhere that it is as simple as simply using the partitive. As in:
Olen iloinen - present
Olin iloinen - preterite
Olin iloista - imperfect

Is it that simple or does the preterite form signify both the imperfect and the preterite?
Thanks.


----------



## pearho

No, it does not work that way.  There is only one simple past-tense form in Finnish, the one you call preterite, and it covers both the preterite and the imperfect. The Finnish tense system is a lot more similar to the English one than that of the Romance languages.


----------



## Gavril

pearho said:


> No, it does not work that way.  There is only one simple past-tense form in Finnish, the one you call preterite, and it covers both the preterite and the imperfect.



However, if the sentence is transitive, you can express the imperfect by using the partitive form of the object (just as Vitalore was saying) rather than the accusative:

Hän syö illallista. "He is eating dinner."
Hän söi illallista kello 18. "He was eating dinner at six in the evening."

Compare this with _Hän söi illallisen kello 18 _"He ate dinner at six in the evening." (= accusative, completed action)


But if the verb in the sentence always takes a partitive object, then you can't make the same contrast:

_Hän auttoi minua rakentamaan taloni. _

This could mean "He was helping me to build my house" or "He helped me to build my house" -- you would need further context to know whether the "helping" is a completed action or not.


----------



## MaijaPoppanen

Gavril said:


> But if the verb in the sentence always takes a partitive object, then you can't make the same contrast:
> 
> _Hän auttoi minua rakentamaan taloni. _
> 
> This could mean "He was helping me to build my house" or "He helped me to build my house" -- you would need further context to know whether the "helping" is a completed action or not.


In my opinion you can make the same contrast in this case (_rakentaa_ is also transitive verb, so you can make a difference by using (or not) partitive after that):
_Hän auttoi minua rakentamaan taloni._    He helped me to build my house.  
_Hän auttoi minua rakentamaan taloani._   He was helping me to build my house.

But:
_Hän auttoi minua läksyissäni. _"He helped me with my homework" or "He was helping me with my homework". In this case you need more context to notice a difference.


With intransive verbs the situation is little bit more complicated.
Sometimes we use different verb:
_Olin iloinen _- romance language imperfect
_Ilahduin_ - romance language preterite

_Olin surullinen_- romance language imperfect
_Tulin surulliseksi _- romance language preterite

And sometimes you need more context to notice a difference:
For example: _Satoi_ can mean "It was raining" or "It rained"
_Kun lähdin ulos, satoi_  - romance language imperfect
_Eilen satoi koko päivän_ - romance language preterite


----------



## pearho

Thanks, Maija, for contributing to the discussion! Maybe we can conclude that the partitive is only one among various means that can be used to convey the sense of the imperfect, and that there is no such simple rule as the one expressed in the original posting.


----------

