Thread:User talk:CodeCat/Finnish declension/reply (13)

Ok, that is an argument that does make some sense to me at least. The fact that the nominative of a noun becomes the accusative of a pronoun shows that there is a functional connection between the two.

But then, if we include them both under "accusative" then people may think that they're equivalent and interchangeable. We do the same with alternative genitive and partitive plural forms, after all. So I propose changing the table a bit, so that the "accusative" line becomes two rows high, and have two sub-rows each showing the two possible types of accusative. What should we call those sub-rows? Is the imperative the only case where the second accusative (the one like the nominative) is used, or are there others?