Introducing the accusative/partitive distinction of the Finnish object in course books for foreigners The distinction between the accusative and partitive case of the Finnish object is often considered as one of the most difficult parts of Finnish gramrnar. In my paper 1 provide an answer to the question why it is so difficult for non-native speakers to cope with this distinction. 1 argue that the accusative/partitive distinction of the Finnish object encodes the aspect of the c1ause. 1 also interpret the Transitivity Hypothesis of Hopper and Thompson (see Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1980: Transitivity in gramrnar and discourse, Language 56. 251-299), in which they c1aim that Transitivity and aspect are deterrnined by their discourse function: high Transitivity and perfective aspect is correlated with foregrounding, while low Transitivity and imperfective aspect with backgrounding. 1 argue that the accusative or partitive case of the Finnish object is not onlyamatter of syntax and semantics but is also dependent on pragmatics and context. Finally 1analyse Finnish course books focusing on their methods to teach the accusative/partitive distinction of the Finnish object. 1 conclude that this function of the accusative/partitive distinction (i.e. the function that accusative refers to foregrounding and partitive to backgrounding) is usually neglected in the practice of teaching Finnish for foreigners since the course books do not offer narratives appropriate for illuminating it.