# Passive



## 盲人瞎馬

Hi, considering I did not misuse this forum's search function, I surprisingly did not find any other thread about the Finnish passive, so I'm making the supposed first one.

Unlike most languages that I can use as a reference (English, Spanish, Portuguese, French), Finnish does have its own way to conjugate in the passive, which I haven't quite understood when to use one and when not to use the other one.

Like in the following example:

Kaikki sukkani löytyivät (active)
Kaikki sukkani löydettiin (passive)

According to what I heard from a few, they both mean the same, but the passive one does sound a tiny bit weird.

Can any of you guys think of a nice way to distinguish and know when to use the passive or not?

Is it worth saying that I do know what active and passive voices are, I just can't understand when to use one and when to use the other one.

Thanks.


----------



## Hakro

The Finnish passive is a strange thing as in fact there is no passive voice in Finnish but there are two verb forms that are used when translating a passive sentence of other languages:

_- Kaikki sukkani löytyivät. _This is called impersonal active; there is no subject (agent) in this sentence, and it doesn't say if there was anybody who did find the socks.

_- Kaikki sukkani löydettiin._ This is called passive, but in fact the expression shows that there was somebody - one or more persons - who found the socks. Some linguists say that this should be called the "4th person" instead of "passive".

The impersonal active is used when there is no agent, when "something just happens".
The passive is used when there is a person agent but you don't want to express who it is and how many they are.


----------



## 880320

Vitalore said:


> 1. Kaikki sukkani löytyivät (active)
> 2. Kaikki sukkani löydettiin (passive)


The verbs are not the same: "löytyä" in #1; "löytää" in #2.
---"Löytyä" ("to be found") is a reflexive verb, "löytää" ("to find") is nonreflexive.
---Sentence #1 means that the socks were found -- they "revealed themselves" to whoever was searching for them. This kind of reflexive verb usage is quite common in Finnish.
---Sentence #2 means that someone found the socks. One could also say: "He löysivät kaikki sukkani" ("They found all my socks"); however, that would be the active voice.


----------



## Gavril

In my opinion, _löytyä _isn't the best verb for illustrating this contrast, because the concept of "finding" implies 1) an object that is found and 2) a person (or other conscious being) who finds the object.

A better example might be _kaatua _"to fall over, collapse" vs. the impersonal form of _kaataa _"to knock down, overturn, etc.":

_Puu kaatui _"the tree fell down"
_Puu kaadettiin_ "someone, or some people, chopped/pulled down the tree"

The first sentence would normally be used when the tree fell over by itself (because it was dead, the roots were weak, etc.). As far as I know, it can never be used when the falling was caused by an agent (a person chopping the tree down, etc.) -- is this correct?


----------



## Hakro

You are perfectly right, Gavril.


----------



## akana

Gavril said:


> As far as I know, it can never be used when the falling was caused by an agent (a person chopping the tree down, etc.) -- is this correct?



Hmm. But what about when you just want to shift the emphasis to the tree for some reason? For example:

_Vasta reilun tunnin Mikon hakkaamisen jälkeen, vihdoinkin kaatui se paksu puu._

Would this be correct?

A related thing that confuses me is how to deal with impersonal active/reflexive verbs like _löytyä_ in negative sentences:

_Sukka ei löytynyt. (?)
or
Sukk*aa* ei löytynyt. (?)

Loppujen lopulta puu ei kaatunut. (?)
or
Loppujen lopulta puu*ta* ei kaatunut. (?)_


----------



## Hakro

akana said:


> _Vasta reilun tunnin Mikon hakkaamisen jälkeen, vihdoinkin kaatui se paksu puu._
> 
> Would this be correct?


It's correct (except that there's no comma), but the chopping Mikko did only made the falling of the tree possible; finally the tree fell down by itself.

(I'd prefer a different form of sentence because _Vasta reilun tunnin Mikon hakkaamisen jälkeen _can be translated also "Only more than one hour after Mikko was beaten".)



> _Sukka ei löytynyt. _possible in certain contexts: _Sukka ei löytynyt vaatekaapista vaan sängyn alta._ _
> or
> Sukk*aa* ei löytynyt. _correct_
> 
> Loppujen lopulta puu ei kaatunut. _correct_
> or
> Loppujen lopulta puu*ta* ei kaatunut. _possible in certain expressions: _Loppujen lopulta yhtään puuta ei kaatunut._


I'm sorry but right now I can't explain why we use nominative and partitive like this.

PS.
_Loppujen lopulta_ isn't exactly incorrect but we are used to say either _lopulta_ or _loppujen lopuksi._


----------

