I was always told that it was always. Subj の direction に object が あります/います。 For something being in a direction of something else. 机の下に犬がいます。 Would be your second sentence for example. I don't know if this is the only way to say it though. So that is really all the advice I can offer.
Ooops. I think I mixed them up in my head. Shows me what I know. I should know better than trying to help with something I don't fully understand. ^-^'
Isn't the same as in english when we would change the stress on whichever part is more important? Like in "机の下に犬がいます。" the location is more important for example someone may have inquired as to where the dog was?
Isn't the same as in english when we would change the stress on whichever part is more important? Like in "机の下に犬がいます。" the location is more important for example someone may have inquired as to where the dog was?
There really isn't any (much) stress in Japanese. The particles convey the words', phrases', and clauses' relations to the sentence, and so word order isn't (usually) all that important. Also, I'm pretty sure that 犬 is the subject in that sentence, not 机. I don't think that ある / いる really take direct objects (at least not by the definition of direct object in English).
I was asking if the word order was achieving the same thing. I didn't mean that the Japanese language uses stress. I was trying to compare it to English to see if I understood how the word order changed the meaning. I guess my question wasn't stated right. I was wondering if the order of words changed the meaning in japanese speech in a similar way that stress does in English. Sorry for the confusion.
Isn't the same as in english when we would change the stress on whichever part is more important? Like in "机の下に犬がいます。" the location is more important for example someone may have inquired as to where the dog was?