Some (of all the world's) rice/wine/water

[j.petsku]

I asked this question in another thread, but it wasn't exactly relevant there so I thought I'd start a new one. My question is, how do you narrow the quantity of mass noun subjects in initial position, which indicate the universal sense, in other words, part of all the rice/wine/water in the world. Some examples:

1. "Some rice is white, but if the germ isn't removed, it's actually brown."
2. "Some water isn't fit for human consumption."
3. "Some snow is light and powdery, while other snow is heavy and wet."

So NOT:
"Some of the rice..."
"Some of the water..."
"Some of the snow..."

Which, I think, would be:
Osa riisistä...
Osa vedestä...
Osa lumesta...

How would sentences like 1, 2 and 3 be translated into Finnish?

[Jukka Aho]

1. "Some rice is white, but if the germ isn't removed, it's actually brown."

When looking at things from the Finnish viewpoint, you’d probably rather say something like this:

Suomalaisissa elintarvikeliikkeissä myytävät riisilaadut ovat yleensä valkoisia, mutta jos alkiota ja leseitä ei poisteta riisinjyvistä eikä riisiä kiilloteta, on riisi itse asiassa väriltään ruskeaa.

Kaupassa myydään yleensä valkoista riisiä, mutta jos alkiota ei poisteta, riisi on väriltään ruskeaa.

2. "Some water isn't fit for human consumption."

Kaikki vesi ei ole juomakelpoista. (= “Not all water is...”)

3. "Some snow is light and powdery, while other snow is heavy and wet."

Joskus lumi on kevyttä ja puuterimaista, toisinaan taas raskasta ja märkää.

Lumi voi olla (tyypiltään) kevyttä ja puuterimaista, mutta myös raskasta ja märkää.

As you can see from the above, the most natural way of expressing such things in Finnish doesn’t follow the English model 1:1...

[j.petsku]

Thanks, Jukka! I kept thinking "osa maailman xx-sta," but as you mention, that's probably more of an English structure. The other thing I kept thinking was just using an existential structure, "On valkoista riisiä, mutta xx xxx xxxxx myös ruskeaa," or something to that effect. But, as is often the case, the context of the conversation would probably direct the structure of the response.

[Jukka Aho]

Thanks, Jukka! I kept thinking "osa maailman xx-sta," but as you mention, that's probably more of an English structure.

You could say “Osa maailman riisistä on valkeaa, osa ruskeaa.” But that’s a strange thing to say... as if the types of commercially-produced rice in the world were something god-given. When phrased that way it sounds like a universal truth of some sort; something pertaining to the laws of physics or chemistry which guide how the world works. “And that, my children, is the way how the types/quotients of rice in the world are laid out!” I can’t imagine a real-world conversation about rice where that sentence would naturally fit in.

The other thing I kept thinking was just using an existential structure, "On valkoista riisiä, mutta xx xxx xxxxx myös ruskeaa," or something to that effect.

Yes, that’s possible, too. “On valkoista riisiä, mutta on myös ruskeaa.” Maybe a bit simplistic or naïve observation, though. “No sh​it, Sherlock? Did you figure this out all by yourself?” ;)

[Bavarian]

2. "Some water isn't fit for human consumption."

Kaikki vesi ei ole juomakelpoista. (= “Not all water is...”)

If you wanted to say "None of the water is fit for human consumption", would that be
Koko vesi ei ole juomakelpoista.?

Or am I not wrapping my brain correctly around kaikki and koko?

[silk]

2. "Some water isn't fit for human consumption."

Kaikki vesi ei ole juomakelpoista. (= “Not all water is...”)

If you wanted to say "None of the water is fit for human consumption", would that be
Koko vesi ei ole juomakelpoista.?

Or am I not wrapping my brain correctly around kaikki and koko?

Koko is used for countable nouns, for example:

Koko lause The whole sentence

Kaikki sounds better for uncountable nouns:

Kaikki vesi All water

Kaikki can, however, be used for countable nouns in plural:

Kaikki lauseet All sentences

Maybe Jukka can elaborate

[Jukka Aho]

2. "Some water isn't fit for human consumption."

Kaikki vesi ei ole juomakelpoista. (= “Not all water is...”)

If you wanted to say "None of the water is fit for human consumption", would that be
Koko vesi ei ole juomakelpoista.?

“Koko vesi ei ole juomakelpoista” sounds like “The entire water is not fit for human consumption.”

Koko vesi is a bit strange expression as water is uncountable. How do you define “the entire water”?

The sentence also implies there apparently must be some “part” of the water that is fit for consumption, then. But water is liquid... so you can’t exactly slice and dice it into chunks with different properties. And if there’s a “part” of the “entire water” that’s fit for consumption, wouldn’t it mix with the other part which isn’t? How do those different parts remain separate if they’re parts of the same body (“entirety”) of water? ;)

So, to answer your question, it depends on the context (again), but simple “Vesi ei ole juomakelpoista” would do if the context makes it obvious what you’re talking about. For example:

Kun menet käymään Prypjatissa, muista, että vesi siellä ei ole juomakelpoista. (vesi siellä = “the water there”)

Saavumme kohta Elboniaan. Muistakaa, että hanavesi ei ole juomakelpoista rajan toisella puolella.

Hanna laski vettä juomalasiin ja oli juuri nostamassa sen huulilleen, kun Mikko tarttui hänen kädestään kiinni lujalla otteella ja pysäytti liikkeen. ”Vesi ei ole juomakelpoista”, Mikko muistutti vakavana.

You could also say:

Tilanne pakolaisleirillä on katastrofaalinen. Täällä ei ole enää lainkaan juomakelpoista vettä.

lainkaan = ollenkaan = roughly “(none) at all”, “(none) whatsoever”; only used in negative sentences

[Rob A.]

As you can see from the above, the most natural way of expressing such things in Finnish doesn’t follow the English model 1:1...

I think this is good to remember...that not everything can be translated directly.... Just as there are certain more predictable ways of saying things in English, so it is as well in Finnish...

I found a koko/kaikki discussion buried on page 1 of this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=44752

...there seems to be less interchangably between kaikki/koko...than there is between "all"/"whole" in English.

Koko is used for countable nouns, for example:

Koko lause The whole sentence

Kaikki sounds better for uncountable nouns:

Kaikki vesi All water

Kaikki can, however, be used for countable nouns in plural

I think this is pretty close to how I understand it. If you are dealing with items normally thought of as discrete units use koko and if normally thought of in "mass" terms, use kaikki, in the singular. In the plural it gets more complicated...you would probably then use only kaikki....but I'm not totally sure ....

Satoi koko päivä....Satoi kaikki päivät lomamme ajan.
..."it rained the whole day."...."It rained all the days of our vacation.'...though I think this probably is not how it would typically be said in Finnish... ??

Kaikki vesi ei ole puhdasta.
"All water is not clean."

....että Suomessakin on kaikki vedet valjastettava heti energiatuotantoon.
Literally,"...that in Finland is all waters harnessed right way to energy production."
..."...that in Finland all waters are harnessed right way for energy production."

In the first sentence, vesi is discussed in the sense of being a mass, uncountable substance. The sense with the last statement is that all waters as a collection of individual rivers I assume, are used for energy production. I notice, though, the verb stays in the singular.

So I'm thinking that koko can only be used with "singularities", but kaikki]/i] can be used with collections of "singularities" and uncountable items.

I think I have this right...???...

[Jukka Aho]

If you are dealing with items normally thought of as discrete units use koko and if normally thought of in "mass" terms, use kaikki, in the singular. In the plural it gets more complicated...you would probably then use only kaikki....but I'm not totally sure .... :?

Sounds correct to me. Or at least I can’t come up with a counterexample right now.

Satoi koko päivä....Satoi kaikki päivät lomamme ajan.
..."it rained the whole day."...."It rained all the days of our vacation.'...though I think this probably is not how it would typically be said in Finnish... ??

Well, you’d typically say “Koko loman ajan satoi! En enää ikinä mene Teneriffalle!” ;)

But “kaikki päivät lomamme ajan” is OK, too, maybe just a bit wordy way of saying it.

(Note: “Satoi koko päivän.”)

....että Suomessakin on kaikki vedet valjastettava heti energiatuotantoon.
Literally,"...that in Finland is all waters harnessed right way to energy production."
..."...that in Finland all waters are harnessed right way for energy production."

“...that in Finland, too, be all waters immediately harnessed for energy production.”
“...that in Finland, too, are all waters to be immediately harnessed for energy production.”

on valjastettava = “is to be harnessed”

The sense with the last statement is that all waters as a collection of individual rivers I assume

Yes. “All waters”, in this context, means all (imaginable, suitable) bodies of water in the country.

So I'm thinking that koko can only be used with "singularities", but kaikki]/i] can be used with collections of "singularities" and uncountable items.

That’s a good way to put it, and you’re correct here... in so far as I can see, at least...