another one problem

[garoowood]

saisinko kysyä yhtä asiaa? Can I say saisinko kysyä yksi asia? Why should I use partitive? Because kysyä need to use partitive?
lainaisitko minulle sanakirjaasi? saisinko käyttää puhelinta? same question as before... Because of lainata and käyttää?
Which verbs need partitive after them, and I just have to memorize them?
saisimmeko ruokalistan. panisitko oven kiinni. viitsisitkö antaa tuon kirjan minulle. why here is accusative with "n" because these verbs do not require partitive?

[Pursuivant]

Can I say saisinko kysyä yksi asia?

Only if you're Tarzan.

And yes, partitive is a bitch http://www.uta.fi/~km56049/finnish/partitive.html

[garoowood]

so I just have to physically memorize all these verbs that require partitive?http://www.uta.fi/~km56049/finnish/partrek.html
no easy way out?

[Jukka Aho]

saisimmeko ruokalistan. panisitko oven kiinni. viitsisitkö antaa tuon kirjan minulle. why here is accusative with "n" because these verbs do not require partitive?

You might want to take a look at these:

• The choice of case for the object / The Accusative or Total Object Rules (Suomen kieli ulkomaalaisille)
• The object, or when to use accusative, partitive, T-plural or basic form (Uusi kielemme)

[garoowood]

saisimmeko ruokalistan. panisitko oven kiinni. viitsisitkö antaa tuon kirjan minulle. why here is accusative with "n" because these verbs do not require partitive?

You might want to take a look at these:

• The choice of case for the object / The Accusative or Total Object Rules (Suomen kieli ulkomaalaisille)
• The object, or when to use accusative, partitive, T-plural or basic form (Uusi kielemme)

Thanks for the links Jukka!
There are Auta vanhus bussiin. and Odota iltaa.from the first link. I learned from the grammar book that imperative takes unmarked accusative for single object. But now it seems it is not an absolute rule. Whether to use unmarked accusative or partitive, it actually depends on whether it is the process or the result one wants to emphasize, right? And the verbs have to be active verbs like rakastaa, etsiä, odottaa etc.? Verbs like ostaa can only take unmarked accusative for the single object, never the partitive in imperative sentences, like Osta kirja, not Osta kirjaa, even you want to emphasize the purchasing process(well it may not make sense but just an example)?

And I should say Auta vanhusta(without the adverbial), which actually emphasizes the process rather than the result or outcome, right? And how do I say help the(some) seniors? Auta vanhukset(known amount of seniors) or auta vanhuksia(some seniors)? If the Auta vanhukset is correct, how do I express it then if I want to emphasize the process not the outcome? Well there seems to be a mixture of emphasizing process or outcome and definite amount(knowned amount) or indefinite amount. In this case, which rule dominates?
Help the seniors(known amount)--Auta vanhukset and what if,at the same time, I want to emphasize the process instead of the result? I guess partitive Auta vanhuksia seems not to be a suitable tool coz it means indefinte amount of seniors(some seniors).

[Jukka Aho]

There are Auta vanhus bussiin. and Odota iltaa.from the first link. I learned from the grammar book that imperative takes unmarked accusative for single object. But now it seems it is not an absolute rule. Whether to use unmarked accusative or partitive, it actually depends on whether it is the process or the result one wants to emphasize, right?

That’s how it would appear to go, although as a native speaker I don’t really consciously evaluate things that way. (Then again, the verb odottaa is on Kimberli’s list of verbs that always call for a partitive object.)

And the verbs have to be active verbs like rakastaa, etsiä, odottaa etc.? Verbs like ostaa can only take unmarked accusative for the single object, never the partitive in imperative sentences, like Osta kirja, not Osta kirjaa, even you want to emphasize the purchasing process(well it may not make sense but just an example)?

Mass nouns, or nouns that are occasionally used in “uncountable” fashion, could be listed as an exception: Osta kalaa! Osta silakkaa! Osta lihaa! Osta maitoa! Osta makkaraa! Market-stall keepers and grocery stores commonly advertise countable produce in that way if the goods are sold primarily by weight or volume: Osta mansikkaa! Osta mustikkaa! A kid could say Osta karkkia! referring to an unspecified amount of candy/sweets in weight or volume or number...

And I should say Auta vanhusta(without the adverbial), which actually emphasizes the process rather than the result or outcome, right?

Yes, it’s as if you’d say “Give some help/relief to the senior citizen(s) / elderly”, “Please give/offer your help to the senior(s)”. If you help them some way along the way, that suffices. It is not about a conclusive result as such.

And how do I say help the(some) seniors? Auta vanhukset(known amount of seniors) or auta vanhuksia(some seniors)?

The latter.

If the Auta vanhukset is correct, how do I express it then if I want to emphasize the process not the outcome? Well there seems to be a mixture of emphasizing process or outcome and definite amount(knowned amount) or indefinite amount. In this case, which rule dominates?

The phrase Auta vanhukset, in isolation, does not sound sensible. To a native speaker, it appears to be missing something. Auta vanhukset... minne? Tekemään mitä? But let’s turn that into Auta vanhukset kadun yli – and now it’s perfectly OK.

Help the seniors(known amount)--Auta vanhukset and what if,at the same time, I want to emphasize the process instead of the result? I guess partitive Auta vanhuksia seems not to be a suitable tool coz it means indefinte amount of seniors(some seniors).

You can use vanhuksia also when the amount is known but the outcome is irresultative.

Compare:

Kadun reunalla seisoo viisi vanhaa miestä. Auta vanhuksia kadun ylityksessä. (=“in [the act of] crossing the street” – the speaker makes no assumption that you/they are necessarily going to succeed... or at least that’s an uninteresting, trivial detail on which we do not pay too much attention here. The focus in this sentence is on the process [act of helping them along the way] rather than the outcome [reaching the goal of getting everyone on the other side].)

To:

Kadun reunalla seisoo viisi vanhaa miestä. Auta vanhukset kadun yli. (=“across the street” – the speaker assumes this task can be taken to its completion and the focus is on completing it.)

[garoowood]

Mass nouns, or nouns that are occasionally used in “uncountable” fashion, could be listed as an exception: Osta kalaa! Osta silakkaa! Osta lihaa! Osta maitoa! Osta makkaraa! Market-stall keepers and grocery stores commonly advertise countable produce in that way if the goods are sold primarily by weight or volume: Osta mansikkaa! Osta mustikkaa! A kid could say Osta karkkia! referring to an unspecified amount of candy/sweets in weight or volume or number...

Yes, actually I meant countable words.

Should I say Auta nuo vanhuksia instead of Auta nuo vanhukset? Auttaa is also a verb that requires partitive from the link you gave. If the former one is correct, then it means for verbs that require partitive, even one refers to definite amount or known things, he should use vanhuksia(partitive plural) instead of vanhukset(norminative plural)?

For countable words and verbs that do not require partitive, I have to say Osta nuo kirjat rather than Osta nuo kirjoja, right?

So compare:
Auttaa--verb requires partitive
Ostaa--verb does not require partitive

The former could pay attention to the process or the result, but the later, on the other hand, pays attention only to the result in the imperative sentences?

Ostin kirjoja... it means I was buying books or I bought some books? Or it actually depends on the context?

[EP]

Should I say Auta nuo vanhuksia instead of Auta nuo vanhukset?

The former should be Auto noita vanhuksia.

If you hear that it means that you should help those people, but not necessarily all of them. You just give some help.

Auta nuo vanhukset means that you should give all the help you can and see that all of them have really crossed the street safely.

[EP]

Osta nuo kirjat rather than Osta nuo kirjoja

Same here. The latter should be Osta noita kirjoja.

Osta nuo kirjat. --> you are supposed to buy all of them.

Osta noita kirjoja. --> You are supposed to choose which books from that pile you buy.

[Pursuivant]

Auta noita vanhuksia. is by itself , Auta nuo vanhukset XXXXXX. needs something for the XXXXXX, kauppaan, saunaan, tien yli, apteekkiin.

[Jukka Aho]

Should I say Auta nuo vanhuksia instead of Auta nuo vanhukset?

Yes, except the pronoun nuo should also take the partitive: Auta noita vanhuksia.

Not to be confused with Auta noitavanhuksia or Auta, noita, vanhuksia! ;)

Auttaa is also a verb that requires partitive from the link you gave. If the former one is correct, then it means for verbs that require partitive, even one refers to definite amount or known things, he should use vanhuksia(partitive plural) instead of vanhukset(norminative plural)?

That would appear to be correct, yes. (Or at least I can’t come up with any counterexamples right now... :P)

For countable words and verbs that do not require partitive, I have to say Osta nuo kirjat rather than Osta nuo kirjoja, right?

Generally yes, except if you want to express a request to buy some unspecified number of books.

Hei, tuolla on alennusmyyntikori! Osta mieluummin noita alennuksessa olevia kirjoja kuin täysihintaisia [kirjoja].

So compare:
Auttaa--verb requires partitive
Ostaa--verb does not require partitive

The former pays more attention to the process, but the later, on the other hand, pays attention to the result.

Auttaa, as such, does not require the object to take the partitive case. Expressions which conform to the structure auttaa + object + a verb in the 3rd infinitive (-maan) do. That’s what Kimberli means by listing auttaa on her page as “auttaa jtk tekemään”.

Autoin sinua pukemaan vaatteet päälle.

vs

Autoin sinut pukeisiin. (=“to the state of being dressed” – from some previous state where you weren’t.)

[garoowood]

All right...

So

Auta noita vanhuksia can have the meaning of Help those seniors(partial of them) or Help those seniors(emphasize on the process), Or, it means both partial number and irresultative?

[Jukka Aho]

So

Auta noita vanhuksia can have the meaning of Help those seniors(partial of them) or Help those seniors(emphasize on the process), Or, it means both partial number and irresultative?

The emphasis is on the act/process of helping; the current, on-going need for help. It’s difficult to see any partial aspect to such request: “those seniors” are targeted as a whole: you’re expected to help all of them to the best of your ability. (Of course, not all of them may actually need or accept your help...)

[garoowood]

The confusion actually comes from http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Suomen_kie ... ject_Rules.

Minä luen kirjoja I will read some books (part of some unspoken about group of books, but I'm not saying if I will finish reading any of them)
Minä luen kirjoja I'm reading some books (part of some unspecified class of books)
Minä luen kirjoja I'm reading the books (the books we have speaking about, but I've not finished reading them)

If partitive plural can both mean ongoing action and partial of something at the same time in the upper mentioned sentences, why can't vanhuksia means both partial and process emphasis at the same time?

Minä luin kirjoja I read some books (I read at least 2 books which I may or may not have finished reading. In the latter case I am stressing that activity of reading is what was important to me)

And how do you say I was reading some books in Finnish, since partitive is only means I know to express ongoing actions.

[Pursuivant]

I was reading some books

Minä olin lukemassa kirjoja.

As far as the verb goes, theres then also "lueskella" - Minä lueskelin kirjaa., which means you were leafing/browsing a book but not reading it with high concentration. Works with other verbs, juosta - juoksennella. lapset juoksevat pihalla (as in having a competition) ve. Lapset juoksentelevat pihalla (just running around).
Not *all* verbs have such a diminutive though.