# siis kyseessä oli



## Gavril

Iltaa,

There are times when I don't quite understand why the word _siis _is being used. For example, I recently saw it used in a context similar to the following:

A: _Luulisin olevan vaikeaa pärjätä holanniksi sielläpäin._ "I would think that it's hard to get by speaking Dutch in those parts."
B:_ Siis kyseessä oli monikansallisen yrityksen haarakonttori, jonka päämaja oli Alankomaissa._ "[??] This was a branch of a multinational corporation based in the Netherlands."

Why would you say that _siis_ appears in this context? 

I don't need an exact English translation -- I'd just like to know what semantic relationship _siis_ is indicating/emphasizing between these two sentences.

Paljon kiitoksia!


----------



## fennofiili

The word _siis _is nowadays often used as a fill word or as an initial particle with no meaning, just to keep a flow of speech coming (and to avoid being interrupted) or to start speaking, much like you would symbolically or actually clear your throat or use “well” as a meaningless particle in English.

Dictionaries don’t describe such usage much, though the practice is old. It is often difficult to sat whether _siis _expresses a conclusion or is used just to express that what you are saying is somehow connected with what was said before. Nowadays _siis _is also widely used as an initial particle. At checkout in a shop, you might hear “Siis sata euroa” as the first sentence of the dialog (to be often followed by just “Kiitos” on both sides, if even that), and this may irritate people who are used to older use of _siis_. 

In the dialog quoted, _siis _seems to be just an initial particle. It makes the conversation (which is rather formal and even “literary” otherwise) a bit more colloquial and more natural-sounding. I guess I would say _no _rather than _siis_, but younger people use _siis _frequently. In real spontaneous dialogs, people would probably use many more words with little or no meaning before getting to the point, something like _No siis kato ku se oli_... (Well, eh, you see, it was...).


----------



## Gavril

fennofiili said:


> At checkout in a shop, you might hear “Siis sata euroa” as the first sentence of the dialog (to be often followed by just “Kiitos” on both sides, if even that), and this may irritate people who are used to older use of _siis_.



Interesting, I think I would have translated that use of _siis_ (if I had to guess a translation) with the English word _so_ -- as in, "You'd like to buy these items, *so* it will be 100 Euros". But in the dialogue from the original post, I couldn't see the kind of logical connection between the two sentences that would allow for a word like "so".

(By the way, the dialogue is my re-wording of something I saw on a message board, but which I didn't want to copy directly because it was a pretty heated debate. I think I kept the basic structure of it intact, though.)


----------



## Spongiformi

I don't fully agree here. In my opinion that _"siis"_ in the example is used to mark the latter sentence as an explanation of the former. You could replace this "_siis_" with "_eli_" for the same effect. Those sentences don't seem perfectly logical in my eyes, or something is missing, but in a clearer case this _"siis"_ might represent the used of "That is," in the beginning of a sentence in English.

It might be hard to get by speaking Dutch in those parts. That is, if they ever try to mingle with the locals and not only stick to their own group.

Voisi olla hankala pärjätä hollannilla siellä päin. Siis jos he koskaan yrittävät tavata paikallisia, eivätkä vain pitäydy omassa seurassaan.


----------



## fennofiili

I think B’s statement explains why it was _not _difficult to get by in Dutch there. So instead of drawing a conclusion from A’s statement or saying it in other words, it tells why A’s assumption was wrong.


----------



## fennofiili

Gavril said:


> Interesting, I think I would have translated that use of _siis_ (if I had to guess a translation) with the English word _so_ -- as in, "You'd like to buy these items, *so* it will be 100 Euros". But in the dialogue from the original post, I couldn't see the kind of logical connection between the two sentences that would allow for a word like "so".



You’re right in the observation that “Siis sata euroa” can be interpreted as a conclusion from some actions or conditions (prices of things, items purchased), and this may well explain the origin of such usage. It’s still rather different from old usage, where such a statement would only be used after saying something, like listing some prices.

Perhaps a clearer example of using “siis” as an initial particle is the rather common use of starting a new post (new discussion) on the internet that way. It comes out of the blue sky, appearing with no previous discussion or action; someone just posts a question, an opinion, or something else and starts it with “siis”, like “Siis mulla on sellainen ongelma, että...” People used to old usage ask themselves what the post comments on or concludes from, in vain. Here “siis” is just a way to start a post.

Here B’s statement is a followup to A’s words, and is related to them, but not the way that “siis” connects in old-style texts or according to dictionaries. In a translation, I might use “Well” or “You see”, though I’m not quite sure of how they might be interpreted—the purpose would be to say nothing really. B’s words can be seen as saying that A was wrong, but saying it in a polite way. People inclined into saying things straight might instead start with “No ei ollut, koska...”


----------



## Spongiformi

fennofiili said:


> I think B’s statement explains why it was _not _difficult to get by in Dutch there. So instead of drawing a conclusion from A’s statement or saying it in other words, it tells why A’s assumption was wrong.



Right. In that case I fully agree with your initial statement. I read those A and B lines a dozen times but I never really got the full logic behind them, so I simply made an assumption. Looks like it was the wrong assumption.

I'm sorry if I needlessly ended up confusing you, Gavril. (Based on two deleted messages.)


----------

