# problems with いる/ある



## Pacerier

hello ppl, i was wondering if its true that when いる/ある is used to mean “I have [something]”, ある is allowed regardless of what the object is (living or nonliving)? E.g. 兄弟が３人ある

Also if a non-living thing can “move” (vehicles / lifts / machines / robots), will both いる/ある be allowed to describe their “existence”? e.g. are both ok: 
(1)エレベータは４５階にいる
(2)エレベータは４５階にある


----------



## Shijin

Hello Pacerier!

As far as I know, いる is preferably used for living things whereas　ある is used for nonliving things and abstract concepts, so I would say 兄弟が３人*い*る.

Those two verbs mainly refer to the _being _or _existence _of things rather than to the fact that you "possess" them. I don't think there is any real equivalent of the verb "to have" in Japanese. From a cultural point of view, it appears that the concept of possession is given little importance, or even despised.

As for the elevator, I would use ある in your example. Even though it moves, it does not make it a _living_ thing.

Hope it helps!


----------



## Aoyama

Shijin is right.
いる would work for humans and animals (all living _things_ , including insects and germs). ある for all the rest, including robots and elevators ... But then, if you wanted to _personify_ a robot or a computer (like Hal in 2001) , you could use いる as a figure of speech. Unusual though ...


----------



## YangMuye

Pacerier said:


> ある is allowed regardless of what the object is (living or nonliving)?


Yes, but not modern Japanese.



> Also if a non-living thing can “move” (vehicles / lifts / machines / robots), will both いる/ある be allowed to describe their “existence”?


いる is only for living things, unless you want to show some special feelings(e.g. regard it as your friend).
ある can be used for living things, but it becomes abstract concept.


----------



## Pacerier

heys all, thanks to your replies i've got it sorted out =)


----------



## Ototsan

Pacerier said:


> hello ppl, i was wondering if its true that when いる/ある is used to mean “I have [something]”, ある is allowed regardless of what the object is (living or nonliving)? E.g. 兄弟が３人ある
> 
> Also if a non-living thing can “move” (vehicles / lifts / machines / robots), will both いる/ある be allowed to describe their “existence”? e.g. are both ok:
> (1)エレベータは４５階にいる
> (2)エレベータは４５階にある



(1) means that the elevator has stopped at the 45th floor and is still there. This sentence is normal and I think you should use it if the elevator is in operation.

(2) is a bit strange and practically speaking, it hardly makes sense. It may be the case that the elevator has been long out of use, but the 'cage' is physically still there.

The same is true with the following pair.

(3) バスがあそこにいる
(4) バスがあそこにある

The bus in (3) is a vehicle you know is in operation for the tourists or in the public transportation. Sentence (4) is a mere description of the bus you see there. The bus in this sentence is an object. It is perhaps temporarily out of operation.  

As for 兄弟が３人ある, I think ある used to be fairly common in this type of construction, but nowadays people prefer to say 兄弟が３人いる. The use of ある here sounds somewhat archaic, but the ある sentence is still perfectly acceptable.


----------



## YangMuye

Ototsan said:


> (1) means that the elevator has stopped at the 45th floor and is still there. This sentence is normal and I think you should use it if the elevator is in operation.
> 
> (2) is a bit strange and practically speaking, it hardly makes sense. It may be the case that the elevator has been long out of use, but the 'cage' is physically still there.
> 
> The same is true with the following pair.
> 
> (3) バスがあそこにいる
> (4) バスがあそこにある
> 
> The bus in (3) is a vehicle you know is in operation for the tourists or in the public transportation. Sentence (4) is a mere description of the bus you see there. The bus in this sentence is an object. It is perhaps temporarily out of operation.



Does this いる means 静止している, 動かないでいる, 守っている, 滞在している ("stay" rather than "exist")....

But when to express the existence (exist or not), which one should I use?
In old Japanese text book, “兄弟が３人ある” is perfectly right, “兄弟がいるか” can not be used to express “Do you have” but “Are they here” or “Are they alive”.


> The use of ある here sounds somewhat archaic, but the ある sentence is still perfectly acceptable.


But some speakers said the sentence was absolutely wrong to them. Only “兄弟が３人いる” was right. 

How about these two sentence?
彼は捕らわれの身にある。
彼は捕らわれの身でいる。
Which one do you think is better?/Are there any difference?

にあるー＞なるー＞な
であるー＞だる?ー＞だ
This is how does na-adjective come from. Japanese ancients thought it's better to use にある/である than にゐる/でゐる to express how things exist.


----------



## Ototsan

YangMuye san, I said the sentence 兄弟が３人ある is archaic, so it is understandable that some people say it's unacceptable. But you should know that we still say あの人は家族がある.

As for your question concerning 彼は捕らわれの身にある, it is hardly relevant, because it contains an idiomatic expression and I wouldn't say 彼は捕らわれの身でいる, because it's stylistically odd.


----------



## Aoyama

> (1)エレベータは４５階にいる
> (2)エレベータは４５階にある
> (1) means that the elevator has stopped at the 45th floor and is still there. This sentence is normal and I think you should use it if the elevator is in operation.
> 
> (2) is a bit strange and practically speaking, it hardly makes sense. It may be the case that the elevator has been long out of use, but the 'cage' is physically still there.
> 
> The same is true with the following pair.
> 
> (3) バスがあそこにいる
> (4) バスがあそこにある


Yes, true. So that would infirm what I wrote earlier (above).
You _can_ say : エレベータは４５階にいる = the elevator is on the 45th floor
whereas :  エレベータは４５階にある = there is an elevator on the 45th floor ...
 バスがあそこにいる  = the bus is (over)there
 バスがあそこにある =  there is a bus (over)there


----------



## Pacerier

> Yes, true. So that would infirm what I wrote earlier (above).
> You _can_ say : エレベータは４５階にいる = the elevator is on the 45th floor
> whereas :  エレベータは４５階にある = there is an elevator on the 45th floor ...
> バスがあそこにいる  = the bus is (over)there
> バスがあそこにある =  there is a bus (over)there


ok just to confirm, does this mean that "normally" we would use いる for elevators / buses?



> we still say あの人は家族がある.


will this be equally alright?:  あの人は家族が*い*る



> “兄弟がいるか” can not be used to express “Do you have” but “Are they here” or  “Are they alive”.


if so which expression is appropriate for us to say "Do you have siblings?"


----------



## Ototsan

Pacerier said:


> ok just to confirm, does this mean that "normally" we would use いる for elevators / buses?
> 
> will this be equally alright?:  あの人は家族が*い*る
> 
> if so which expression is appropriate for us to say "Do you have siblings?"



Q1. I would say yes. Note incidentally that I always use ある for bicycles, motorcycles, wheelchairs, etc. I guess I don't consider bicycles etc. to be sophisticated ('animate') enough 

Q2. If you ask which is more common / frequent, my answer is without doubt いる.

So ある / いる of 'being (found) somewhere' and ある / いる of existence-possession behave a bit differently.

私[に]は兄弟が３人ある is OK for many speakers including myself (私[に]は兄弟が３人いる is always OK), but 私の３人の兄弟は東京にある is definitely not. You must say 私の３人の兄弟は東京にいる.

--
I've just noticed that if you say あそこに車がいる, then the car is unlikely to be your car, i.e., the car you drive. In other words, it is somebody else's. If you say あそこに車がある, then the car may equally be yours or somebody else's. So it is very strange to say that 私の車は車庫にいる, but you would always say 私の車は車庫にある. Note that you usually don't operate an elevator nor drive a bus.


----------



## Pacerier

heys thanks guys that's very informative =)


----------



## Tsukigalleta

Ok, now I'm dizzy XDD
It's great to be a foreigner, everybody forgives my mistakes with いる and ある


----------



## Ototsan

Tsukigalleta said:


> Ok, now I'm dizzy XDD
> It's great to be a foreigner, everybody forgives my mistakes with いる and ある



Perhaps you are right. The distinction involves some logic, though. The choice between いる and ある in the meaning 'being (found, seen) there' reminds me of that between '(s)he' and 'it' when you want to refer to a dog. It the dog is familiar to you, say your own or your neighbor's, then you will most likely use '(s)he', whereas you would use 'it' if it is unfamiliar to you, say a dirty homeless. So at issue is not syntax-semantics, but pragmatics.

Imagine a robot like Sunny in the movie "I, Robot." If you say あそこにロボットがいる, then the robot is in operation, and is 'behaving' like a human being. But if you say あそこにロボットがある, then the boot is most likely to be switched off, standing upright motionless or lying dead on the floor.

On the other hand, if you are a mother visiting a doll museum with you three-year-old daughter, then you will likely to say to your daughter　お人形さんがいっぱいいるね. Note that dolls are less 'animate' than robots like Sunny, at least in my opinion.


----------



## samanthalee

Aoyama said:


> いる would work for humans and animals (all living _things_ , including insects and germs).


Just like to point out that in English, we consider plants as living things too, but in Japanese, plants don't qualify for いる.


----------



## Tsukigalleta

Ototsan said:


> Perhaps you are right. The distinction involves some logic, though. The choice between いる and ある in the meaning 'being (found, seen) there' reminds me of that between '(s)he' and 'it' when you want to refer to a dog. It the dog is familiar to you, say your own or your neighbor's, then you will most likely use '(s)he', whereas you would use 'it' if it is unfamiliar to you, say a dirty homeless. So at issue is not syntax-semantics, but pragmatics.
> 
> Imagine a robot like Sunny in the movie "I, Robot." If you say あそこにロボットがいる, then the robot is in operation, and is 'behaving' like a human being. But if you say あそこにロボットがある, then the boot is most likely to be switched off, standing upright motionless or lying dead on the floor.
> 
> On the other hand, if you are a mother visiting a doll museum with you three-year-old daughter, then you will likely to say to your daughter　お人形さんがいっぱいいるね. Note that dolls are less 'animate' than robots like Sunny, at least in my opinion.


Yes, you explained everything very well. Thank you for all your effort. Although it's difficult, I'm glad I know now more about this


----------



## Tsukigalleta

samanthalee said:


> Just like to point out that in English, we consider plants as living things too, but in Japanese, plants don't qualify for いる.


Thank you Samanthalee "meowderator"


----------



## Aoyama

> Just like to point out that in English, we consider plants as living things too, but in Japanese, plants don't qualify for いる.


Right. I wonder what happens in case of a carnivorous plant ...


----------



## Pacerier

Aoyama said:


> Right. I wonder what happens in case of a carnivorous plant ...




also, are cells considered いる? what about dead cells?


----------



## Flaminius

I don't think I would use いる for elevators, buses, cells.  It just does not sound right.  In cases where ある is inappropriate (for instance, inanimate mobile objects such as elevators), I'd use 止まっている.

エレベーターは45階で止まっている。


----------

