# pyydämme ... kertomaan totuuden



## Gavril

Iltaa,

I'm curious why the following quote (from a news article) has the accusative form _totuuden _rather than the nominative _totuus_:



> – Pyydämme puhdistamaan Ykköskanavan henkilökunnan omantunnon ja oman omantuntonne ainakin osasta vääristelyä ja kertomaan totuuden, kirjeessä kirjoitettiin.



"The letter says, 'We ask [you] to clear away at least some of the falsification from the conscience of Ykköskanava's employees and your own consciences, and to tell the truth.'"

Since _pyydämme_ has no explicit object here, the request seems to be impersonal ("We ask that X be done"), even though the object is understood to be the people at Ykköskanava.

I thought that the lack of an explicit object would mean that a dependent verb (in this case_ kertomaan_) should have its object in the nominative (_totuus_) rather than the accusative (_totuuden_). Am I wrong about this?

Kiitos avustanne


----------



## DrWatson

Gavril said:


> I thought that the lack of an explicit object would mean that a dependent verb (in this case_ kertomaan_) should have its object in the nominative (_totuus_) rather than the accusative (_totuuden_). Am I wrong about this?


This rule you mentioned doesn't sound right. There is a relationship between the subject and the object: if the subject, be it implicit or explicit, is not in the nominative or the sentence type doesn't allow subjects, the object takes it's case instead. This applies to e.g. necessive constructions and passive sentences:
_[Minun] pitäisi kai päästää kissa sisälle._ '_ probably ought to let the cat inside.' : the subject is in genitive → total object takes the nominative
Kissa päästettiin sisälle. 'The cat was let inside.' : passive verbs don't have subjects → total object takes the nominative



Gavril said:



– Pyydämme puhdistamaan Ykköskanavan henkilökunnan omantunnon ja oman omantuntonne ainakin osasta vääristelyä ja kertomaan totuuden, kirjeessä kirjoitettiin.

Click to expand...

Here the subject is clearly me so the object can't be in the nominative._


----------



## Gavril

DrWatson said:


> Here the subject is clearly _me _so the object can't be in the nominative.



I'm not talking about the subject of the main verb (pyydämme), but about the subject of the infinitives following the verb (_puhdistamaan _and_ kertomaan)._

For example, in this sentence, the subject of _kertomaan_ is _te_ (the object of the main verb _pyydämme_):

_Pyydämme __teitä __kertomaan __totuuden _"We are asking you to tell the truth"

By contrast, in the sentence below (adapted from the original quote),_ kertomaan _has no explicit subject (because _pyytää_ has no explicit object)_, _so I am not sure whether the object of _kertomaan _should be nominative or accusative:

_Pyydämme kertomaan __totuuden/totuus__._


----------



## DrWatson

I understand what you're saying but there is no relation like you're describing between the objects of the main verb and the infinitive. The object of the infinitive verb behaves similarly to the object of the main verb with regard to case. From VISK § 936:





> Etenkin A- ja MA-infinitiivin totaaliobjektin sija vaihtelee hallitsevan lauseen rakenteen mukaan, kun infinitiivilauseke on verbin täydennyksenä. Tällaisille lauseille on myös ominaista, että infinitiivin subjekti tulkitaan samaksi kuin hallitsevan rakenteen subjekti tai objekti. –– Infinitiivin objekti käyttäytyy sijan suhteen kuin olisi finiittiverbin objekti, riippumatta väliin tulevien infinitiivien määrästä.


So, _Pyydämme (teitä) kertomaan totuuden_ is the only option here.

EDIT: I just realised that _teitä _is in partitive and _totuuden _is in genitive so the rule above doesn't quite apply. But there's still nothing in the sentence that would make the object become nominative. If it were passive, necessive or imperative (1st or 2nd person), then nominative would be the correct one:

_Teitä pyydettiin kertomaan totuus.
Meidän täytyy pyytää teitä kertomaan totuus.
Pyytäkää häntä kertomaan totuus!_


----------

