need help understanding -han suffix

[ching_chong_peruna]

I'm having some trouble understanding the nuances of the -han suffix. For example, in this exchange:

- "Kuinka luonnistui asia?"

- "Kuinkahan tuo luonnistui?"

Can someone translate this? I've looked here but it didn't help much because I'm still not sure which tone the reply is in: Sarcastic? Incredulous? Mocking? Just what exactly does this -han do in this exchange in particular, but also in general?

[jahasjahas]

I'm having some trouble understanding the nuances of the -han suffix. For example, in this exchange:

- "Kuinka luonnistui asia?"

- "Kuinkahan tuo luonnistui?"

Can someone translate this? I've looked here but it didn't help much because I'm still not sure which tone the reply is in: Sarcastic? Incredulous? Mocking? Just what exactly does this -han do in this exchange in particular, but also in general?

There's something funny going on with your example. First of all, "Kuinka luonnistui asia?" doesn't make much sense, and I don't see how you can follow that with "Kuinkahan tuo luonnistui?". Some additional context might help.

So how about:

A: Pekka korjasi kattomme.
B: Kuinkahan tuo luonnistui?

A: Pekka fixed our roof.
B: I wonder how that went?

Here -han seems to hint that B doesn't entirely trust Pekka's skills. (Sarcastic or mocking undertones could be possible if B says his line that way.) I think B's word choices "tuo" and "luonnistui" also add to this. "Kuinka se onnistui?" would be a neutral way of asking "How did it go?".

[Jukka Aho]

A: Pekka korjasi kattomme.
B: Kuinkahan tuo luonnistui?

A: Pekka fixed our roof.
B: I wonder how that went?

When tacked to the end of the question words (missä, mihin, kuinka, koska, etc.) or words which have been converted into a question by applying the -ko/-kö ending (juokseeko, menetkö, tulenko, kysyikö...), the -han/-hän ending is equivalent to asking “I wonder where/how/when/whether...”

When used with straightforward statements (which are not questions), it sounds like you’re trying to remind yourself or your listeners about some inevitable fact, trying to make yourself or your audience accept it.

Onhan hän sentään rehtori.
“He’s the principal, after all.”

-han/-hän is also used for emphasis when arguing about something, roughly the same way as -pa/-pä in similar contexts.

— Prinsessa ei ole kovin kaunis.
— Onhan! (“She is, too!”)

[ching_chong_peruna]

There's something funny going on with your example. First of all, "Kuinka luonnistui asia?" doesn't make much sense, and I don't see how you can follow that with "Kuinkahan tuo luonnistui?". Some additional context might help.

OK, thank you. The example is from a selkokieli version of the Seven Brothers so the language might be archaic sounding or old-fashioned, maybe. But I quoted it as it was printed in the book.

[Jukka Aho]

There's something funny going on with your example. First of all, "Kuinka luonnistui asia?" doesn't make much sense, and I don't see how you can follow that with "Kuinkahan tuo luonnistui?". Some additional context might help.

OK, thank you. The example is from a selkokieli version of the Seven Brothers so the language might be archaic sounding or old-fashioned, maybe. But I quoted it as it was printed in the book.

I think jahasjahas meant those two lines, strung together as a piece of supposed dialog, doesn’t sound much like an “exchange”. It’s more like just the same question rephrased.

That is, unless the second question has a sarcastic or cheeky intent, deliberately paraphrasing/parroting the original question in jest or in order to hint that the person asking such a question should already know the answer, or at least he can now easily deduce it from the tone of the second speaker’s voice, from his facial expression etc.

• • •

The verb luonnistua has a bit old-fashioned or folksy/dialectal/colloquial ring to it. I think modern writers are generally a bit shy of using it and would rather replace it with onnistua, sujua, or hoitua.

[Upphew]

The example is from a selkokieli version of the Seven Brothers so the language might be archaic sounding or old-fashioned, maybe.

One of the first novels in Finnish... archaic and old-fashioned sounds like right adjectives in that case.

[AldenG]

-han/-hän is also used for emphasis when arguing about something, roughly the same way as -pa/-pä in similar contexts.

— Prinsessa ei ole kovin kaunis.
— Onhan! (“She is, too!”)

But isn't it still so here that the difference between -pa and -han is that -han begs agreement where -pa is assertive or defiant?

So that Onhan is like "You can't mean that" or "Surely you have to agree she IS."

I mean both can be translated as "Of course she is," but still there is a difference between -han and -pa, in that -han generally means "Don't we all know that (such and such a thing is true)" while -pa is more on the level of schoolyard "Is not!" -- "Is too!" ?

[jahasjahas]

OK, thank you. The example is from a selkokieli version of the Seven Brothers so the language might be archaic sounding or old-fashioned, maybe. But I quoted it as it was printed in the book.

Great, I checked the context. I understand it now.

The brothers try to court the girl together, but end up leaving the house shouting and even throwing a rock at the door.

Eero, who was waiting outside, asks "So, how did it go?" and gets an angry reply: "How do you THINK it went?". Eero is the youngest and smartest, always making fun of his brothers' blunders, so he's the sarcastic one in this discussion.

The Finnish kirjakieli hadn't been fully standardised when Kivi was writing, so his local dialect can be clearly seen in the novel's language. So, maybe Seitsemän veljestä isn't the right place to learn the nuances of -han unless you want to sound like you've travelled in time from the 19th century Nurmijärvi. But don't let that stop you from enjoying the book!

[Jukka Aho]

-han/-hän is also used for emphasis when arguing about something, roughly the same way as -pa/-pä in similar contexts.

— Prinsessa ei ole kovin kaunis.
— Onhan! (“She is, too!”)

But isn't it still so here that the difference between -pa and -han is that -han begs agreement where -pa is assertive or defiant?

So that Onhan is like "You can't mean that" or "Surely you have to agree she IS."

Yes, you’re right, that characterization captures the difference between the two quite well, in the most basic sense. But in practice, the tone of voice you use for -han/-hän can make it a functional replacement for -pa/-pä — defiant and stubborn (“I should surely know this thing better”) instead of marking a mere plea for agreement. So it’s about delivery as well.

[Pursuivant]

- Sä oot
- Ite oot
- Sä oot eka
-Enhän oo
-Oothanpas
-Enhänpäs oo, ite oothanpaspä
-Sä oot kumminkinpaspä eikuvinku
- Mun isä on isompi kun sun isä

[Jellyfish]

First post.... I'm a native finnish-speaker, and was just perusing this site as I've always wondered how difficult learning finnish must be for foreigners.

The "funny" thing is, that you can sometimes choose which word you want to have the -han/hän suffix, and the meaning stays exactly the same. If someone who is better at "kielioppi" could explain a rule why it sometimes works, and sometimes doesn't

In the aformentioned "Onhan hän sentään rehtori" which means “He’s the principal, after all.”, we can put the -han/hän after any of the words, and it works

"Onhan hän sentään rehtori"
"Hänhän on sentään rehtori"
"Rehtorihan hän sentään on"
"Sentäänhän rehtori hän on" (sounds weird, but the meaning is the same)

In "Prinsessahan ei ole kovin kaunis" which means "the princess isn't all that beautiful, after all", it doesn't work 100% with every variant

"Kovinhan kaunis prinessa ei ole" (works)
"Eihän prinsessa kovin kaunis ole" (works)
"Kaunishan prinsessa ei kovin ole" (sounds weird, not sure if you can actually say that)

You can't use on/ole as the first word here, probably because the negative "ei" needs to always come before it. "Olehan ei prinsessa kovin kaunis" doesn't really work

What's the rule here?

[Jukka Aho]

The "funny" thing is, that you can sometimes choose which word you want to have the -han/hän suffix, and the meaning stays exactly the same. If someone who is better at "kielioppi" could explain a rule why it sometimes works, and sometimes doesn't

[...]

What's the rule here?

According to VISK (§ 829), -han (-hän) is an element used in main clauses. The -han suffix is tacked onto the first part-of-speech of the “prominent” clause in a sentence. This is typically a single word, but it could also be a noun phrase, in which case the suffix is added to the end of the headword. Or at least that’s what their example suggests (and it would sound natural):

Suomalaisen puheen mallihan ovat pitkät monologipuheenvuorot keskeytyksittä ilman spontaaneja välihuudahduksia.

VISK further goes on to note that in sentences such as...

Mä en mene sinne, koska huomennahan on se tarkastustilaisuus.

...the clause “huomennahan on se tarkastustilaisuus” may appear to be a subordinate clause but is actually the main clause, and the other clause in front of it is a “non-restrictive complement”. Those, in turn, are described in more detail in another (rather hairy) chapter, § 1114.

I think the word orderings you listed which appear weird or sound poetic, are weird (or poetic-sounding) even without the addition of -han. But it is worth noting that you did what a native speaker would be naturally inclined to do: arrange it so that the word onto which you’re attaching the suffix takes the first position in the clause.

[Vellamo]

"Onhan hän sentään rehtori"
"Hänhän on sentään rehtori"
"Rehtorihan hän sentään on"
"Sentäänhän rehtori hän on" (sounds weird, but the meaning is the same)

"Kovinhan kaunis prinessa ei ole" (works)
"Eihän prinsessa kovin kaunis ole" (works)
"Kaunishan prinsessa ei kovin ole" (sounds weird, not sure if you can actually say that)

You had the jist of it, but a couple of word orders are a bit peculiar, I think. Here are my suggestions for word orders:

"Sentäänhän hän on rehtori" (still sounds weird, I wouldn't use this) - I also wouldn't use "Rehtorihan hän sentään on" but I guess the meaning does stay the same and understandable.

Also: "Kovin kaunishan prinsessa ei ole" is just fine.

[AldenG]

"Sentäänhän hän on rehtori" (still sounds weird, I wouldn't use this)

Or as the man said when he parked his Wartburg

Jätän tän tänne.

[Vellamo]

Jätän tän tänne.

Clever, AldenG! That sounded so natural to me that I took a moment to figure out what the point was...