As has been explained, the negative in Finnish only exists in combination
with the personal pronouns as a negative verb, and there is no word
corresponding to _no_ or _not_. This peculiarity naturally makes the
structure of negative sentences different from that of other languages.
(1) The answer ‘no’ to a question must be rendered by the proper person
of the negative verb, with or without the root of the verb negative.
To the question =Tuletteko?= _are you coming?_ the negative answer is
=en tule= _or_ =en=, if one person is referred to, but =emme tule= _or_
=emme=, if more than one. Similarly, to =tulevatko lapset?= _are the
children coming?_ the negative reply must be =eivät tule= _or_ =eivät=.
(2) If a sentence contains such words as _never_, _no one_, _nothing_,
_nowhere_, etc., they are expressed by using the proper person of the
negative verb, with the proper case of the interrogative pronoun or
the interrogative adverb, which receive the termination =kaan= _or_
=kään=, sometimes shortened into =aan= _or_ =ään=. =Emme ole nähneet
ketäkään= _or_ =ketään=, _we have seen no one_. =Missä olette käyneet?
En missäkään=, _where have you been? Nowhere_. =Onko hän koska ollut
Helsingissä? Ei koskaan= (_or_ =Ei milloinkaan=) _has he ever been to
Helsingfors? No, never_.
(3) It is clear that as the negative is always joined to a personal
pronoun, sentences where it qualifies an infinitive in most languages
(for instance, _it would be better not to go_) cannot by any means
be rendered literally in Finnish. Such sentences are turned quite
differently, the chief device being to use the abessive of inf. III; for
instance, _I advise you not to go_, =minä kehoitan teitä, älkää menkö=,
_or_ =olemaan menemättä=. =Olisi parempi olla kirjoittamatta=, _it would
be better not to write_. _The house is not sold_, =talo on myömättä= (but
=ei ole myöty= is also possible). _The present is not given_, =lahja on
antamatta= (_or_ =ei ole annettu=). _You need not go_, =ei sinun pidä
mennä= (where =ei= negatives =pidä= not =mennä=), _or_ =sinun pitää olla
menemättä=. _You will have to go away and not see your sister_, =teidän
pitää matkustaa pois sisartanne näkemättä=.
Sentences are occasionally found where =ei= apparently negatives an
infinitive. E.g. S. John vii. 34, =Teidän pitää minua etsimän ja ei
löytämän=, _ye shall seek me and not find me_. But this construction is
really elliptical for =ja ei pidä löytämän=.
Nevertheless this use of the negative verb with an infinitive or
participle is occasionally found, even in the Kalevala; e.g. xxviii. 262,
=Sie vanno valat ikuiset ... ei sotia käyäksesi=, _swear eternal oaths
... that thou willst not go to war_. And immediately afterwards, =Vannon
mie valat vakaiset En kesänä ensimmäisnä ... Saa’a suurihin sotihin=, _I
swear firm oaths that in the first summer ... I will not go to war_. Here
=käyäksesi= and =saa’a= (for =käydäksesi= and =saada=) are infinitives
constructed with =ei= and =en=. In the first passage =et= would have
seemed more natural. So again in xliii. 237, =Sanoit et käyväsi sotoa=,
_thou saidst thou wouldst not go to war_. As these constructions do not
seem capable of being explained by the principles of Finnish syntax, they
are probably due to the influence of foreign languages.