Rob A. wrote:I'm not sure yet, though, how to handle, in Finnish, the matter of "aspect"... In English you can say, "I sit", "I am sitting" and "I do sit".....all in the present tense, but each having a different aspect. Some of it is handled with particles such as -pa, etc.....
You start out with
istun. You could also say
minä istun but as Finnish has those personal markers “built-in” to the verbs, explicitly “repeating” the subject of the sentence,
minä, is superfluous, in a way. It is not wrong as such, though – and it doesn’t even sound particularly clumsy, so there’s no need to avoid it for that reason – but it is usually just a waste of time and typing effort... unless you need to include that personal pronoun for some additional emphasis, for example.
Now, whether
istun means “I sit”, “I am sitting”, or “I will sit” is all based on contextual clues, as already mentioned above. For example, what has been discussed immediately before may anchor the currently studied sentence firmly into a certain English tense, even though there might not necessarily be enough information for making that judgment when the sentence is considered alone, out of the context.
To continue on the bathroom theme, often
the situation itself may provide sufficient clues, just because all the other interpretations would be implausible:
— Istutko vessassa?
— Istun.
This is a casual conversation, perhaps between a wife and a husband. With no further clues, it is pretty obvious – given the subject matter – that this kind of a discussion was probably conducted in the confines of someone’s private home or some other comparable, relatively private space.
It is rather unlikely that this would be an inquiry about habitual customs or tendencies (“Do you, at times, sit in the bathroom [on the toilet]?” “I do.”). It is equally unlikely that this inquiry would concern someone’s future plans or desires (“Will you sit / be sitting in the bathroom [on the toilet]?” “I will.”). The only plausible interpretation, then – as we have no other clues – is that this must be about the present continuous tense: “Are you sitting in the bathroom [on the toilet] [right at this moment, as we speak]?” “Yes, I am.” You don’t really need anything more concrete to come to that conclusion – or if you think you do, you’re theorizing about things a bit too much. ;)
But there are situations where mere
istun would be too ambiguous, of course, or where you just want to make sure that the other party gets your point. When you have that kind of a situation in your hands, you would add clarifying words and expressions such as
huomenna,
illalla,
juuri nyt,
normaalisti,
yleensä,
tällä hetkellä,
viiden minuutin kuluttua,
aina,
koskaan,
milloinkaan,
ensi vuonna,
kun kesä tulee,
heti kun olen valmis etc.
• • •
As for convincing someone “I
do sit!”, or quarreling about something “I
am sitting,
too!” – that’s the territory of clitics such as
-han and
-pa(s).
1:
-han
—
Istun tällä hetkellä Eiffel-tornin ravintolassa.
—
Nyt huijaat. Et varmasti istu!
—
Istunhan!
— I’m sitting, at this very moment, in the restaurant on Eiffel Tower.
— You’re kidding me. I’m sure you aren’t!
— But I am! [Of course I am; you’re just being silly for trying to deny the facts!]
2:
-pa(s)
—
Et sitten istu tuohon nojatuoliin. Se on varattu minulle.
—
Istunpas.
— You’re not going to sit on that armchair. It’s reserved for me.
— I am, too. [You can’t tell me around. I’m going to do whatever I want. Nyah nyah!]
Chief Fluffy Brain think heap simple.
