What's new

どこにありますか。 vs. どこですか。

J44xm

経験値が足りない
6 Dec 2004
549
12
28
As I understand from recent events and postings, どこですか is legal Japanese, right? This confuses me a bit because I was under the impression that locations, including interrogatives like どこ, essentially required ある or いる with に used as the particle of location. (For example, あの猫はどこにいますか。) Is there some sort of difference between the uses?
 
Doko ni arimasu ka?
Where does it exist? (an inamiate object) ni shows location in this case.

Doko desu ka?
Where is it?

I'm no expert, but hope that helps.
 
I would have thought the same as GCL. The difference being "where something exists" and where something "is". Although, of course in English asking someone "where does the cat exist?" will make you look like a weirdo.
 
Bucko said:
I would have thought the same as GCL. The difference being "where something exists" and where something "is". Although, of course in English asking someone "where does the cat exist?" will make you look like a weirdo.


Yeah, they used that skit on I am yan. I was like that's weird.
 
trust me on this, doko desu ka is a much more common usage. while doko ni arimasu/imasu is grammatically sound, it is not used very often, and would sound rather awkward.

toire ha doko desu ka... the most important phrase while travelling in japan.
 
nhk9 said:
trust me on this, doko desu ka is a much more common usage. while doko ni arimasu/imasu is grammatically sound, it is not used very often, and would sound rather awkward.
toire ha doko desu ka... the most important phrase while travelling in japan.

As for toilet paper, where is it?

You mean toire o doko desu ka?

I guess it sounds natural though.
 
GoldCoinLover said:
As for toilet paper, where is it?
You mean toire o doko desu ka?
I guess it sounds natural though.

Wrong. "As for" = "は" (wa), it is the topic marker. "toire" is the subject.

toire wa doko desu ka (As for the toilet, where is it?)
 
Bucko said:
Wrong. "As for" = "は" (wa), it is the topic marker. "toire" is the subject.
toire wa doko desu ka (As for the toilet, where is it?)

Oh okay. I got toire wrong anyway.

It's amazing you can tell the difference. Some teachers say "wa" and "ga" are interchangeable because they are so similar.

So what would be some examples of "wa"?

Watashi wa kebin desu.
I'm the topic here.

But what are some others?

Thanks
 
GoldCoinLover said:
Oh okay. I got toire wrong anyway.
It's amazing you can tell the difference. Some teachers say "wa" and "ga" are interchangable because they are so similiar.

I can't claim to know the full difference, but it's best not to think of them as the same. I've been struggling with these two buggers ever since I started studying and I'm still getting them wrong constantly. I think of "wa" as saying "as for the *something*" (toire wa = as for the toilet), and I think of "ga" as "it is the *something*". "sushi ga suki desu" = "it is sushi that I like".

This might not be a good way to think of it though.:p
 
Bucko said:
I can't claim to know the full difference, but it's best not to think of them as the same. I've been struggling with these two buggers ever since I started studying and I'm still getting them wrong constantly. I think of "wa" as saying "as for the *something*" (toire wa = as for the toilet), and I think of "ga" as "it is the *something*". "sushi ga suki desu" = "it is sushi that I like".
This might not be a good way to think of it though.:p
ごめん、私は今かえった所(ところ)です
👋
Yeah, and I also heard "ga" puts more emphasis on the subject.
You know, I really want a grammar book.
Wish I had the money for one.
My birthday is in a month! (February 13th) maybe I can ask one for my birthday.
I just learned (I think?) that I may be able to use "wo" if it follows a verb.
 
The difference between wa and ga is actually quite distinct, and most teachers tell beginners of the language that "wa" and "ga" are almost the same simply because of 2 primary reasons:

either
1) the teachers don't want to confuse the beginner with all the grammatical syntax and rules during the beginning stages of learning
2) the teachers are not proficient enough or not confident enough to explain rigorously to japanese learning students (although they themselves could be able to distinguish when to use which one, teaching is another matter)

Your best solution is to ask an expert in the language (perhaps a university professor) or, more feasibly hit the books. The book called "All about particles" should help, although it may be a boring read at times. I find that asking this kind of question to a native may not be as useful as you might think, since it's not easy to give a rigorous and satisfying answer.

as a rule of thumb, wa is used commonly in contrastive situations; emphatic situations.
ga is normally used in relative clauses; when a subject appears for the first time in an article.

also, when ga is used, the emphasis is on the subject, whereas when wa is used, the emphasis is more on what is said about the the subject (topic)

dai nippon teikoku no guntai ga takusan no hito wo kuroshiteimashita
the emphasis here is on the imperial japanese army (answers the question whom?, who were killing the people? etc.)
dai nippon teikoku no guntai ha takusan no hito wo kuroshiteimashita
the emphasis here is on what the imperial japanese army did (answers the question what atrocities did they commit? etc.)
 
J44xm said:
As I understand from recent events and postings, どこですか is legal Japanese, right? This confuses me a bit because I was under the impression that locations, including interrogatives like どこ, essentially required ある or いる with に used as the particle of location. (For example, あの猫はどこにいますか。) Is there some sort of difference between the uses?

Just to address this point, it's my understanding that です here acts as a filler for the "real" verb. For instance, if you have a situation like the "unagi sentence" then you can see that です takes the place of the verbal にします:

甲:私はマグロにします。
乙:私はうなぎです。
This is a scene in a restaurant, where the second person omits the verb and replaces it with です to complete the sentence.
 
Bucko said:
I would have thought the same as GCL. The difference being "where something exists" and where something "is". Although, of course in English asking someone "where does the cat exist?" will make you look like a weirdo.
"Doko ni arimasuka?" isn't something I've encountered enough to analyze very distinctly other than the politeness aspect (the only phrasing I can think of more would be Dochira ni XXX wa arimasu ka?). I have sometimes seen it used in situations like Bucko described, though, where you are modulating the question from the perspective of being uncertain that the thing being looked for actually exists, or at least is in the place it should be, and where "doko desuka" may be taken therefore as overly assertive or arrogant. ☝
 
Elizabeth said:
"Doko ni arimasuka?" isn't something I've encountered enough to analyze very distinctly other than the politeness aspect (the only phrasing I can think of more would be Dochira ni XXX wa arimasu ka?). I have sometimes seen it used in situations like Bucko described, though, where you are modulating the question from the perspective of being uncertain that the thing being looked for actually exists, or at least is in the place it should be, and where "doko desuka" may be taken therefore as overly assertive or arrogant. ☝
Hmm, I think you're reading too much into this here. There's nothing about "doko ni arimasu ka" that suggests any uncertainty about whether or not the item in question does or doesn't exist. If you wanted to ask that, you'd most likely get "arimasu ka" without any "doko" or "dochira" (you don't generally ask _where_ something is unless you're convinced that it is, in fact, somewhere.)

One difference between "doko desu ka" and "doko ni arimasu ka" is that the former can be used in some cases where the latter cannot, thanks to the "loose" application of desu.

To just throw out one example (that I think should work)...

「最寄り駅はどこですか?」 / Where is the nearest station? (to a particular place)

I think you'd be very unlikely to see 「最寄駅はどこにありますか?」, and I would say that this is because the nuance of the sentence is 「最寄り駅は*何駅*ですか?」 -- i.e. "where" as in "what station", as opposed to asking "where is the station located?" It's kind of a subtle difference, but it kind of makes sense to me.

(I hope someone will correct me if I've made any glaring mistakes here.)
 
I could be wrong.

But I was always taught to think of 「です」 as "it is/is it". So in my mind 「どこですか?」 literally means "where is it?" and 「どこにあります」or 「どこにいます」 means "where is it located/exists?". I don't know where I'm getting the "located" part from though...


It seems weird (to me) to ask "where is it located?" unless you're looking for some very specific directions to where it is "located".

"where's the dog?" --> In my room
"where's the dog located?" ---> The dog is hiding under the bed in my room
 
Nicky,

You have the right idea. It is just that "is" has two different meanings (in English.)

The dog is an animal.

The dog is over there.

--> In these two sentences, "is" has different meanings. In Japanese, they have two different words, not the same word.
 
jt_ said:
Hmm, I think you're reading too much into this here.ツ ツ There's nothing about "doko ni arimasu ka" that suggests any uncertainty about whether or not the item in question does or doesn't exist. If you wanted to ask that, you'd most likely get "arimasu ka" without any "doko" or "dochira" (you don't generally ask _where_ something is unless you're convinced that it is, in fact, somewhere.)
Yeah, or I suppose also as a polite way of addressing situations where an item seems to have been misplaced or omitted. The last time I can recall hearing it applied this way was in the context of a hotel guest, after briefly searching and not finding the room bath towels laid out or in any obvious space but not ready to accuse anyone of them not being there entirely merging the "where" and "if" questions together very roundaboutly.
The use here was more a function of respect and discretion than any serious ambiguity as to whether the hotel supplied towels or not....anyway, it was just an example. 😊

Like I prefaced the original post my experience with "doko ni arimasuka" has not been very profound. The station example helped. Thanks !
 
Last edited:
jt_ said:
To just throw out one example (that I think should work)...
「最寄り駅はどこですか?」 / Where is the nearest station? (to a particular place)
I think you'd be very unlikely to see 「最寄駅はどこにありますか?」, and I would say that this is because the nuance of the sentence is 「最寄り駅は*何駅*ですか?」 -- i.e. "where" as in "what station", as opposed to asking "where is the station located?" It's kind of a subtle difference, but it kind of makes sense to me.
Thanks, all, for the replies. I had no idea that "doko ni arimasu ka" was so uncommon. Regarding your example, jt_, to be sure I understand, would the difference be between asking "Which station is the nearest?" (最寄駅はどこにありますか?) and "Where is the station that is nearest?" (最寄り駅はどこですか?)?
 
J44xm said:
Thanks, all, for the replies. I had no idea that "doko ni arimasu ka" was so uncommon.
Did anyone say it was uncommon? (I don't think I did, at least.) 487,000 google hits (and mind you, this is just 「どこにありますか」 and not alternate patterns like 「どこにある」, etc.) say that it's certainly not exceedingly rare.
J44xm said:
Regarding your example, jt_, to be sure I understand, would the difference be between asking "Which station is the nearest?" (最寄駅はどこにありますか?) and "Where is the station that is nearest?" (最寄り駅はどこですか?)?
I think I was saying that 「最寄り駅はどこですか」 or 「一番近い駅はどこですか」 would basically be equivalent to "What's the nearest station?" (or "What station is the closest?") and that 「・・・どこにありますか」 would rarely be found in this situation.

Here's another example that might be easier to understand: 「行ってみたい国はどこですか?」 ("What country would you like to visit?") I think you would never get 「どこにありますか」 here. This is kind of a "loose use" of どこですか -- you're
asking _what country_ the person would like to visit, not asking about the location of that country.

I think I'm not explaining this very well. At any rate, this isn't a comprehensive explanation of the differences between the two expressions. It's just one example that I thought of where it seems that one would work and the other wouldn't.
 
That final example helped a lot. But I'm wondering why "desu" is more appropriate than "dochira," which holds both "which" and "where" connotations, as I understand it. Thanks.
 
J44xm said:
That final example helped a lot. But I'm wondering why "desu" is more appropriate than "dochira," which holds both "which" and "where" connotations, as I understand it. Thanks.
Maybe my post was poorly worded, but I wasn't talking about "doko" vs. "dochira", I was talking about "doko desu ka" vs. "doko ni arimasu ka"

"doko" vs "dochira" is another issue, and probably a more straightforward one.

"dochira" can be used as a polite variant of "doko" in almost all circumstances.

There are many cases where the reverse is not true. When "dochira" is used to mean "which (of two alternatives)" or "who" (e.g. 「どちら様でしょうか」), you can't replace it with "doko". (Random note: the casual equivalent of "dochira" when used to mean "which (of two)" is 「どっち」)

(I wrote this post really fast, so I may have left something important out. Anyhow...)
 
No, jt_, your post was fine. I understand the "doko desu ka" vs. "doko ni arimasu ka" angle. I just felt that I should ask because "dochira" seemed that it would be legal for use as well. I didn't know that "dochira" could often be used as a more polite "doko." (I'm aware of the "which" and "who" circumstances, but thanks for pointing them out.) Many thanks, as always.
 
Back
Top Bottom