'Se' for 'that'

Learn and discuss the Finnish language with Finn's and foreigners alike
Post Reply
cssc
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:15 pm

'Se' for 'that'

Post by cssc » Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:23 pm

I have noticed that 'se' is used a lot in Finnish where I would want to write 'tuo'.

Would this be one of those sentences?

"I don't live in that motel any more."

Please give me some other examples, & if there are guidelines for the use of 'se' this way.

I am a beginner so please translate your sentences into English.
Thank you!!!



'Se' for 'that'

Sponsor:

Finland Forum Ad-O-Matic
 

User avatar
jahasjahas
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:08 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by jahasjahas » Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:12 pm

Here's a nice article on how to explain tämä/tuo/se to Finnish learners: http://www.kielikello.fi/index.php?mid= ... 1&aid=1296

Unfortunately, it's in Finnish.

The author has found this explanation to work the best:
tämä viittaa puhujan näkökulmasta lähelle ja tuo vastaavasti etäämmäs; se taas viittaa kuulijan näkökulman kautta sekä kuulijan lähipiiriin että kuulijasta etäämmäs. Tyypillinen tämä ja tuo viittaavat myös kuulijan kannalta uuteen, se taas kuulijan kannalta tuttuun.
tämä refers to something that is "near" from the viewpoint of the speaker. tuo refers to something that is "far" from the viewpoint of the speaker. se refers to something that is "near" or "far" from the viewpoint of the listener. Additionally, tämä and tuo typically refer to things that are new information to the listener, while se refers to something that is already known to the listener.

Here's an English article on täällä/tuolla/siellä and tässä/tuossa/siinä which have a similar distinction: http://uusikielemme.livejournal.com/5206.html

(I would offer some examples, but I have some pancakes that need frying. I'll write more tomorrow if necessary.)


cssc
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by cssc » Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:28 pm

Thanks for the uusi blog link. I have REALLY been trying to learn the Tässä, täälla, tuossa, tuolla, siinä, siellä section of the book I am studying from this week, but this gave a little bit more detailed explanation of when to use them.
I still would like to see more examples using 'se', though. I mean, doesn't 'Se on mukava' mean "That's nice"?? Must be because the listener already knew about it, then?
Was my example correct, or not?
The more examples I have, the easier it is for my brain to absorb, I think.
Thanks so much.


Upphew
Posts: 10088
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 10:55 pm
Location: Lappeenranta

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by Upphew » Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:34 am

cssc wrote:I mean, doesn't 'Se on mukava' mean "That's nice"??
Se on mukava = it is nice. When spoken that could also mean s/he is nice. For that's nice I would use se on mukavaa, sepä kiva, sepä mukavaa. First referring to some activity and latter two being just general positive replies in the spirit of "How are you doing?" "Fine." "That's nice"
http://google.com http://translate.google.com http://urbandictionary.com
Visa is for visiting, Residence Permit for residing.


User avatar
jahasjahas
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:08 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by jahasjahas » Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:43 pm

{I see you climbing a tree.}

Tuo näyttää mukavalta! (That looks nice!) -- referring to a thing that is "far" from me as a speaker

{I decide to try it too.}

Tämä on mukavaa! (This is nice!) -- referring to a thing that is "near" me as a speaker

{I climb down.}

Tuo oli mukavaa! / Se oli mukavaa! (That was nice!) -- they both mean exactly the same thing - I can use "tuo" because it is "far" from me (I'm not doing it anymore) or use "se" because I'm referring to a thing that is now "known" in the context of the conversation (since we both know that it just happened and it is "the previous thing")

Or I could say "Tämä oli mukavaa!" (This was nice!) to describe our whole tree climbing session.

{I meet someone else and tell them about my day.}

Me kiipesimme puissa. Se oli mukavaa! (We climbed trees. It was nice!) -- referring to a thing that was just mentioned

---

Let's use "se on mukava" too, since that was your initial example sentence.

{We're shopping for sofas.}

Tuo näyttää mukavalta! (That looks comfortable/nice!)

{I decide to sit on it.}

Tämä on mukava! (This is (a) comfortable/nice (one)!)

{I stand up.}

Tuo oli mukava! / Se oli mukava! (That was (a) comfortable/nice (one)!)

{I buy the sofa and tell someone about my purchase.}

Minä ostin sohvan. Se on mukava! (I bought a sofa. It's comfortable/nice!)


ml14
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:21 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by ml14 » Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:06 pm

Maybe the distinction between deictic and anaphoric pronouns is useful here.

A deictic pronoun is one that refers to something that the speaker is pointing out or signalling to (e.g., "You see this book I'm holding?", or "You see that mountain over there?").

An anaphoric pronoun refers back to a noun that has already been mentioned (or, sometimes, forward to a noun that will be mentioned) -- for example, "Tampere? No, I've never been there."

Would it be fair to say that se only falls into the second category above, or can it be used in both ways?


User avatar
jahasjahas
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:08 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by jahasjahas » Tue Jul 08, 2014 6:28 pm

ml14 wrote:Would it be fair to say that se only falls into the second category above, or can it be used in both ways?
See the section "Tilanteinen se" in the first article I linked for some examples of deictic se.


cssc
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by cssc » Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:59 pm

Thanks for the great examples. I am going to print them out & study them.
So in my sentence "I don't live in that motel any more.", I could use 'se' because the motel was known to me? Right?


User avatar
jahasjahas
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:08 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by jahasjahas » Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:54 pm

We need some context to answer your question.

the speaker just mentioned the motel: "En asu siinä motellissa enää."

the speaker is looking at the motel / pointing at it / etc: "En asu tuossa motellissa enää."


cssc
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by cssc » Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:26 am

I was thinking of the first context. :)


ml14
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:21 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by ml14 » Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:40 am

jahasjahas wrote:
ml14 wrote:Would it be fair to say that se only falls into the second category above, or can it be used in both ways?
See the section "Tilanteinen se" in the first article I linked for some examples of deictic se.
Which of the examples in that section involve pointing out something new to the listener?

At the end of the section, the author seems to be saying that se is not used in this way:
Tilanteinen se ei ole muunkieliselle kovin vaikea omaksuttava, koska demonstratiivi on aika lähellä 3. persoonan pronomineja (esim. he, she, it). Olennaisin merkitysero on se, että 3. persoonan pronomineja voi käyttää osoittavastikin, voi vaikka viitata kädellä ja sanoa He’s my brother (sama pätee astetta heikommin it-pronominiin). Käytön tarkan suomenmukaisuuden saavuttaminen onkin tältä osin kiven takana, mutta toisaalta se-demonstratiivin osoittava (= viron see-sanan tyyppinen) ylikäyttö on viestin perillemenon kannalta aika haitatonta.


User avatar
jahasjahas
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:08 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by jahasjahas » Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:25 am

ml14 wrote:Which of the examples in that section involve pointing out something new to the listener?
"Something new" isn't the main issue - it's still a deictic reference to something both the speaker and the listener are aware of, not an anaphoric reference to something that was mentioned in the discussion.

Anyway, sentences 24-27 are specificially mentioned as sentences where the referent is new to the listener.
At the end of the section, the author seems to be saying that se is not used in this way:
He's saying that it isn't used to refer to something that is physically pointed at. A deictic reference doesn't have to involve physically pointing at something.

I'll write some more tomorrow, good night!


ml14
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:21 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by ml14 » Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:46 am

jahasjahas wrote:
ml14 wrote:Which of the examples in that section involve pointing out something new to the listener?
"Something new" isn't the main issue - it's still a deictic reference to something both the speaker and the listener are aware of, not an anaphoric reference to something that was mentioned in the discussion.

Anyway, sentences 24-27 are specificially mentioned as sentences where the referent is new to the listener.
True, but in these sentences the referent is clear enough that there is no need to direct the listener to where it is (by physically pointing to it or otherwise). se in these sentences refers to what is already salient in the current context.

When the last paragraph says "Olennaisin merkitysero on se, että 3. persoonan pronomineja voi käyttää osoittavastikin," I understood osoittava to mean "indicating the location (of something)", without necessarily physically pointing to it.


User avatar
jahasjahas
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:08 am

Re: 'Se' for 'that'

Post by jahasjahas » Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:02 pm

Kun tilanteisella se-demonstratiivilla viitataan (osoittavan tämä- ja tuo-ilmauksen sijasta) kuulijan kannalta aivan uuteen kohteeseen, kohde on normaalisti aivan kuulijan absoluuttisessa tai suhteellisessa lähipiirissä. Demonstratiivikin on viittauksen onnistumisen takeeksi yleensä substantiivilla tai muulla lisällä täydennetty:

24) Annapa se sininen siitä vierestäsi.

25) Pistä se sopimus vaikka siihen siniseen mappiin.

26) Nyt jos antaisit sen pienemmän kirveen.

27) Kun menet alakertaan, varo niitä maalattuja kohtia portaissa.

Puhujalla ei tarvitse olla havaintoyhteyttä tarkoitteeseen (päinvastoin kuin vastaavissa tuo-viittauksissa). Riittää kun puhuja pystyy kuvittelemaan tilanteen, jossa kuulija on lähellä kohdetta (huomaa erityisesti esimerkki 27). Katseyhteys ja jopa nyökkäys kuulijan suuntaan voi toisaalta olla mahdollinen.

Uuteen mutta kuulijan lähipiirissä sijaitsevaan kohteeseen viittaavan se-demonstratiivin suhde edellä esiteltyyn toiseen se-tyyppiin on ymmärrettävä. Mitä lähempänä kohde on, sitä helpompi on saada siihen havainto- tai tietoyhteys. Jos se on aivan käsissä, siihen on jo oikeastaan tuo yhteys. Lähipiirissä oleva uusi tarkoite on siis ikään kuin puoliksi ”vanha” viittauskohde.
When a situational se demonstrative (instead of a pointing tämä or tuo) is used to refer to a target which is completely new to the listener, the target is usually right in the listener's absolute or relative vicinity. And to ensure that the reference is understood correctly, the demonstrative is usually supported with a noun or other complement.

24) Give me the/that blue one that's right there next to you, will you.

25) Place the/that contract in the/that blue folder, for example.

26) Now, if you could give me the/that smaller axe.

27) When you go downstairs, watch out for the/those places where the stairs have been painted.

The speaker doesn't need to have eye contact with the referent (unlike in the corresponding tuo reference). What's necessary is that the speaker can imagine a situation where the listener is near the target (note especially example #27 (=where the listener can't see the painted stairs yet, but the speaker is already referring to a future situation where he is)). On the other hand, the speaker can make eye contact or even nod towards the listener.

It's easy to see the relation between a se demonstrative that refers to a target that is new but in the listener's vicinity, and the previously explained type of se demonstrative (examples 18-23 (=where the target is something that both the speaker and the listener are aware of)). The nearer the target is, the easier it is for one to achieve a "connection of perception or information" (=to see/hear/notice it or become aware of it). If it's literally within a hand's reach, we can say that such a connection basically exists already. So we can say that a new referent that is in the listener's vicinity is already a half-"old" referent.


Post Reply