Ten Common English Mistakes Made by Finns, part one

Learn about - and receive tips on how to overcome - ten common mistakes Finns make when they speak English. Each mistake will be discussed in detail. An opening slide will show the mistake, then show the wrong way Finnish speakers say it and then the correct way that English speakers say it. After that, I will spend some time discussing the mistake. Sometimes I provide you with reasons why the mistake is made, sometimes I give you a tip on how to get past the mistake and often it's a combination of both. At the end of each video, I talk about my other projects and provide you with further resources to improve your English. Finally, I summarize what you have learned by showing you a series of slides. Each slide gives a tip for getting past the mistake learned in the videos, as well as one or two good English sentences that you can study from.

A little bit in Finnish concerning the reason for the point of these videos: Miten opit tunnistamaan 10 yleisintä virhettä joita suomalaiset tekevät puhuessaan englantia. Vihjeitö virheiden välttämiseen.

Link to my Udemy course called '50 Common English Mistakes Made by Finns':

My Twitter handle:
@FinnsEngMistake

Finnish Flag image courtesy of Wikipedia Creative Commons

Links to my other videos:

[Jouzou]

This reminds me of my English teacher saying: "In Finnish, we 'see' dreams, but in English, we 'have' dreams".

[Pining_for_the_fjords]

Most of these mistakes can be explained by the way the Finnish language works. Finnish has one verb; katsoa, meaning both 'watch' and 'look at', so they don't change the verb depending on whether the object is moving. Coincidentally, I was once talking to a Finnish girl about this exact rule. She confused 'watch' and 'look at' and I explained to her the rule about whether the object is moving. And Finnish also has one adjective; pitkä, meaning both 'long' and 'tall'.

As for 'in' and 'on', we say 'in a house', 'in a garden', 'in a town' and 'in a country', but 'on a road' and 'on a street' and 'on an island'. I'd say the use of 'in' and 'on' is mostly arbitrary and foreigners should learn it case-by-case.

Interestingly, as far as I understand (from learning Finnish for a very short period of time several years ago), Finnish also uses 'in' and 'on' arbitrarily, but when used with city names. -lla at the end of the word means 'on', and -ssa at the end means 'in', but some cities use -lla to mean 'in the city' while others use -ssa. For example Helsingissä - 'in Helsinki', but Tampereella - in Tampere. I wonder if any native Finnish speakers know if there's a rule for which places use -lla and which use -ssa.

[Spetulhu]

I've not seen it too often when Finns write English, but I've got a friend who for some reason manages to leave out "the" from every place you should have it while using it everywhere else. It certainly doesn't stop him from keeping a lower department management position in a multinational corporation so it's not a major issue, but it's still pretty irritating to slog through his English texts. Especially for someone with the patience to read Lord of the Rings in English at age 12. ;-)

[mikeylejan]

Why are Scandinavians so good in speakint with English? My friend from the Philippines visited Iceland, Denmark and Sweden, he loved it!

[TDMFAN]

I would add to the difference between 'to watch' and 'to look at, ' when you look at something it literally just means your eyes are pointed in its direction, even just briefly - whereas watching something means to 'observe' it for a period of time - and yes the movement part is important too. 'Watching' would be contrasted with 'reading' text, both of which are examples of 'looking at' different things. If it is an inanimate object though (such as art), then you would simply say you are 'looking at' it.

I suppose another way to explain is if you have your mobile phone and want somebody to look at an image, you would ask them to 'look at this image, ' if you wanted them to read a message you would ask them to 'read this message, ' and if you wanted them to watch a video then you would ask them to 'watch this video.'

[feferi]

As someone who grew up with one English speaking parent and one Finnish speaking parent these examples and rules were very helpful! The only one I had a problem with was the TV/Mountain example for looking vs. watching. It wasn't as clear cut for me, as I feel they are more interchangeable than you imply. I suppose I mean neither feels like it would be wrong in either example, just be more of a give-away that perhaps the speaker is not using their native tongue? Ah, I do not know how to explain. Growing up bi-lingual often feels as though you are not fluent in either language, ha ha!

[OldieBugger]

These tips are very good reminders! Those kind of mistakes I make very easily if I don't speak English every day.

[nissehult]

Got an eleventh: There's just one word for a temporary exchange.
So, can I borrow that? or can you lend me that? could turn into can I lend that? or can you borrow me that?

[myrskyk]

This was really useful and the tips you gave are really good! I tend to make the mistake between in and on, and hearing your examples just made it a lot clearer! Thank you for making these videos! :)

[ummacles]

For the first one, I think an interesting exception (or perhaps just a quirk) is when you're using the imperative to get someone to make eye contact with something that is moving: "Look at him go!" and "Look at what's on TV.". In both cases, you're telling someone to do something that they would probably use a different verb for if the listener were to respond indicating that they're complying, though the latter may simply be a direction to glance at it and not necessarily pay attention for very long, or to see what is physically placed on the television set. I think that the subtle but important difference with this usage is that you're probably not telling the listener to simply watch something for any constructive purpose (such as learning something or being entertained), but rather to elicit an emotional response: "Wow! I'm *amazed* at how fast he is!" or "Huh, that was an *interesting* news story.". When the listener responds that they are complying with the direction, I think that the verb choice may indicate if they understand why you're telling them to look at it: "Okay, I *see* him running (but I don't really understand why you're asking me to do this)." versus "Okay, I am watching him run (and I see what's up; I'll get back to you once he's done).", and "Okay, I see what's on TV (but it's just some guy taking)." versus "Okay, I'm watching it now (and I see why you had me check this out).". I think that another subtle difference is when you're telling someone to observe what you're doing for educational purposes: "Look at how I do this." versus "Watch how I do this." (with "how" being important — changing "how I" to "me" again probably against suggests impression versus non-impression purposes). I feel that "look at how" suggests focus on precise movement or technique, while "watch how" suggests taking in the whole series of steps as a general process. These again go back to still observations versus observing a series of motions, though being cognisant of this distinction in this context without having to really carefully analyse the word choice and structure is probably extremely difficult to learn intuitively, and I think is really quite the demonstration of how fluent one actually is in the language.

[kazukitokaji]

I'm actually Japanese. But this is really good video for japanese as well. Thank you so much. Kiitos!

[annesteenbeck]

Thank you, Kevin! It was really useful and I´m looking forward to watch some more videos made by you!

[millacarne]

Hey Kevin! Thanks for an interesting video. These are actually the same things I've been explaining to my students in elementary school (ages 9-15), and usually students tend to remember the correct usage when a logical explanation is offered. A good explanation always broadens the student's understanding of the language and its meanings. It's cool to have you as backup!

[NessaGorneth]

I speak and write English very well, but still this video was very nice to watch, as my ability to produce correct English language hasn't really come from consciously acknowledging the rules of the grammar etc such as you mentioned while giving these examples. Not all the while at least. I've always watched a lot of English spoken movies etc, so the correct structure of the language has greatly just stuck to my subconscious along with the basic teachings during my school days, except the every day mistakes that of course are bound to occur as English isn't my mother tongue.
But as said, videos such as these are great ones to exist because they enable me and many others to check our skills in English by learning are we in fact following the actual rules of the language while using it. So thanks! :)

[Drakeblood]

Except, interestingly, you would have somebody *watch* your things for you while you were in the bathroom, but it would be downright weird to say "Hey bro, will you look at my things while I get in line?". They're watching to make sure the items don't *move* from their original place.

Also, we don't move *onto* houses, we move *into* them. Consequently, we stand *in* houses, not on them, but we sit *on* things that are inside of the house. We could even almost sit *inside* of a couch depending on how relaxed we're feeling.

[Nilguiri]

I'm English and I occasionally teach English here in Spain. That rule about being to stand up in/on a bus, etc. is really useful. I've often thought about how to explain which one to use and have never come up with any useful trick to remember which to use. So thanks for that! It seems to be related to when you get in, you then have to _get out_ and when you get on, you have to _get off_. I wonder why a submarine is different. Maybe because you have to physically get out of a "sealed container, " rather than getting off it, but I guess you could say the same about a bus, etc., so I don't think it's that. Oh well. Cheers.

[Mkananoja]

About tall/long subject:
What i would present as thumb rule is that "people, animals, plants, buildings and everything else vertical is measured as height."
I think its quite important to press the mater that people and animals are described as height, and examples should more or less resolve around this specific scenario.

In Finnish language, people and animals' height is described as length, when everything else is described as height. This is why you get common mistakes of people being 180 centimeters long. while sentences of "this buildings is 5 stores high/tall" are not much of a problem.
By presenting a thumb rule of "the height of this three is 5 meters", while working one, fails to account this very exception of word "long/length" usage present in Finnish language, and thus likely confuses students or completely gets ignored as it is "something we know already, there is nothing new".

But derp, you present great thumb rules for "ralli enklanti" speakers :D

[tumpe]

Thank you! This video helped me alot! :)

[Antrell]

Basically wish is past and hope is future.

[panthoni]

Paljonko kello on? "How plenty is the bell?" 😆