# -n kanssa, -n jälkeen



## akana

I was wondering how to use structures like _-n kanssa_ and _-n jälkeen_ where, for one reason or another, a case other than the genitive would seem to be required before the post-position. Would the following sentences be correct?

_Tulin keittiöön kupillisen mehua kanssa.
Lasin vettä jälkeen voimani palasi ja pääsin maaliviivalle._

And if not, are there any instances in which a different case _would_ come between the genetive and post-position?

Also, would the following example be correct?

_Kävin kerran intialaisravintolassa ystävän kanssa, joka ei piitannut mausteista._

...where _kanssa_ would seem to be required just before the joka clause?

Kiitoksia teille!


----------



## etrade

Little hint...

kuppi mehua = mehukuppi
lasi vettä = vesilasi


----------



## sakvaka

Are _mehukuppi_ and _kuppi mehua_ really the same? To me, it sounds natural to say _lasin vettä kanssa_, or rather _mukanani lasi vettä_.


----------



## JukkaT

To me _lasin vettä kanssa _(or _kupin mehua kanssa_ as in the original sentence) doesn't sound natural.
I would say:
_mukanani kuppi/kupillinen mehua_
or _mehukupin kanssa_ (in this case the cup can be empty or full).



akana said:


> _Lasin vettä jälkeen voimani palasi ja pääsin maaliviivalle._


This doesn't sound natural either.
I would say _vesilasillisen jälkeen voimani palasivat..._  (In this context _voima_ is normally used in plural).



akana said:


> _Kävin kerran intialaisravintolassa ystäväni kanssa, joka ei piitannut mausteista._


 There was just one i missing in the word _ystäväni_.


----------



## akana

Kiitoksia teille!



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by akana
> Kävin kerran intialaisravintolassa ystäväni kanssa, joka ei piitannut mausteista.
> There was just one i missing in the word ystäväni.



So with this sentence, would it sound more natural as:
_Kävin kerran intialaisravintolassa *mukanani ystävä, joka*..._

Or would the two sound equally natural? I always stumble when trying to construct something where _joka_ isn't directly preceded by the word it refers to, but I'm not sure if that's a valid concern.


----------



## hui

> So with this sentence, would it sound more natural as:
> _Kävin kerran intialaisravintolassa *mukanani ystävä, joka*..._
> 
> Or would the two sound equally natural? I always stumble when trying to construct something where _joka_ isn't directly preceded by the word it refers to, but I'm not sure if that's a valid concern.


No, it would sound funny, a song, or a nursery rhyme. _*Joka *_refers to the previous noun, not the previous word.


----------



## etrade

akana said:


> So with this sentence, would it sound more natural as:
> _Kävin kerran intialaisravintolassa *mukanani ystävä, joka*..._


 
Your orginal sentence was clear and that sounds mumble to some ears , still grammar is ok.


----------

