Türi

This comment is in reference to what Piimapukk wrote and in reaction to what viimenliivlane wrote in comment to Giustino's blog post "the vanity of giustino." The reason this comment was posted here was that my comment was deleted — when I reloaded the page sometime after having posted, this one was lost.

@viimneliivlane:

I first thought on 19.02.2011., 17:39 that
"
Türil is still literally and grammatically correct :P
"
— but then started having doubts:

The inessive (seesütlev) -s suffix means being inside of something, like Tallinnas (olen linnas/Räpinas/Elvas; illative/sisseütlev with läksin Tallinnasse, läksin linna), but some placenames that encompass a piece of land (like Türi or Mustamäe) require being on them grammatically: Türil, Mustamäel.

So, when going somewhere, declining placenames refers to going into them or onto them (Tallinnasse, Otepääle, respectively).

Yet when moving oneself ontop of something, then läksin mäe peale ([I] went on a hill), kõndisin/ronisin mäe otsa ([I] walked/climbed ontop of a hill), ronisin puu otsa ([I] climbed onto a tree). Speaking of trees and other vertical constructs (as far as I have understood): Notwithstanding whether one is on a tree or ontop of a tree, the person is still puu otsas. Anything (or anyone) that's physically attached to a tree, including branches, on puu küljes. Puu peal applies once the tree or a large piece of wood (horizontally) lies on the ground. On a tree and on its branch: puu otsas oksa peal.

In case of Türil, then the grammar cancels the raunchiness out, by design, methinks, because if I do take into account the dirty form, then it's in plural partitive (osastava mitmuses) already and that can't be further declined or construed in any other way than what it politely means. So there.