# doko + desu or imasu/arimasu



## jadeite_85

What is the difference in meaning in those two sentences between the use of desu and imasu/arimasu in combination with doko:

Reizouko wa doko ni *arimasu* ka

Eki wa doko *desu* ka


----------



## translationbykako

Hi jadeite 85,

Both are perfectly fine and interchangeable; first one (ni+arimasu) is a bit more formal than the second one (deko desu).

Literal translation of "Reizouko wa doko ni* arimasu* ka" is
"Where does the refrigerator exist?"
You can also say, "Eki wa doko ni* arimasu* ka", 
which trasnslates to "Where does the station exist?"

Literal translation of "Eki wa doko *desu* ka" is
"Where is the station?"
You can also say, "Reizouko wa doko *desu* ka"

Kind of like the difference between "Where is the station located?" vs "Where is the station?"

Hope it helps,

Sincerely,
Kako


----------



## jadeite_85

Thanks for the useful explanation.


----------



## translationbykako

You're welcome! 

Best Regards,
Kako


----------



## C_Nor

jadeite_85 said:


> Thanks for the useful explanation.


 
Yes! Very useful explanation! Now, I understand 'ni arimasu' is more formal, whereas, 'desu' is less formal. 

Domo arigato gozaimashita, Kako.


----------



## Flaminius

The point is that _da_/_desu_ is a pronoun-like verb.  In other words, it can substitute a verb that has been previously mentioned or is obvious from the context.

The question, "Eki wa doko ni arimasu ka" can be answered by "XXX ni arimasu" but the more concise "XXX desu" is good too.  Here, _desu_ substitutes _ni arimasu_ and means "What is mentioned immediately before me is the address of something."


----------



## C_Nor

Flaminius said:


> The point is that _da_/_desu_ is a pronoun-like verb. In other words, it can substitute a verb that has been previously mentioned or is obvious from the context.
> 
> The question, "Eki wa doko ni arimasu ka" can be answered by "XXX ni arimasu" but the more concise "XXX desu" is good too. Here, _desu_ substitutes _ni arimasu_ and means "What is mentioned immediately before me is the address of something."


 
Wakarimashita.  Domo arigato gozaimashita, Flaminius!


----------



## q_006

Flaminius said:


> The point is that _da_/_desu_ is a pronoun-like verb.  In other words, it *can substitute a verb* that has been previously mentioned or is obvious from the context.
> 
> The question, "Eki wa doko ni arimasu ka" can be answered by "XXX ni arimasu" but the more concise "XXX desu" is good too.  Here, _desu_ substitutes _ni arimasu_ and means "What is mentioned immediately before me is the address of something."


Can you do that for *any* verb? Or just arimasu/imasu?


----------



## Flaminius

It's not just with arimasu/imasu but with any verb.  It may be that my "it can substitute a verb" was ambiguous.  Should I have written "verbs"?

A: 何を食べたの。
B: チョコレートだよ。

Here, だ substitutes を食べた, a conglomerate of a postposition, a verb stem and a tense marker.....!


----------



## q_006

Alright. Just making sure......


----------



## Nino83

Flaminius said:


> it can substitute a verb that has been previously mentioned or is obvious from the context


Does it mean that the question レストランはどこですか。 is similar to レストランがあるところは、どこですか。, i.e similar to a cleft sentence like （私たちが）食べるものは、何ですか。?

Is, more or less, this the logic? 

*どこに*レストランが*ありますか*。 => どこにレストランがあるのは、ここ*です*。=> (レストランがあるのは、)*どこですか*。
*何を食べますか*。 => 何を食べるのは、これ*です*。 => (たべるのは、)*何ですか*。


----------



## ktdd

I think I may have a less mind-bending explanation for this どこにあります／どこです thing.

The Japanese copula (or 断定の助動詞) in its various forms is, in fact, a compound.
だ most certainly comes from である->であｰ>だ.
The origin of ですis less certain, but some theories suggest a politer form of である, e.g. であります or でございます.
Then である itself is a combination of に(locative marker) + て(conjunction) + あり(the existential verb). (にて is still used in very formal writings to mean で - at/in/etc)
である's classical counterpart, なり, is said to be a contraction of にあり and is often written as such, especially in the negative (にあらず).

When one considers the above history, I think there shouldn't be a surprise that どこにあります and どこです mean the same thing.


----------



## Nino83

ktdd said:


> Then である itself is a combination of に(locative marker) + て(conjunction) + あり(the existential verb). (にて is still used in very formal writings to mean で - at/in/etc)


Wow. 
But if どこにあります and どこです (どこにてある) mean(t) the same thing, does it mean that some time (century) ago there wasn't a marked difference between _to exist_ and _to be_, and that the "existential" (and, maybe, locative) meaning of です was partially lost in _equative_ sentences like _kore wa nihon-go no hon desu_?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> Does it mean that the question レストランはどこですか。 is similar to レストランがあるところは、どこですか。,


You can use the second one when you're asking the (one) point where the restaurant is there. You're in the large hall, and asking the spot where the restaurant is located. If not, the second may be a bit repetitive.


----------



## ktdd

Nino83 said:


> does it mean that some time (century) ago there wasn't a marked difference between _to exist_ and _to be_, and that the "existential" (and, maybe, locative) meaning of です was partially lost in _equative_ sentences like _kore wa nihon-go no hon desu_?


Frankly, I don't know, my friend. I only know in classical texts, you have to be careful with にあり. It can mean "to exist somewhere" or "to be something."


----------



## Nino83

It's interesting to know that the meanings of ある and だ partially overlapped in classical texts.


----------



## ktdd

Nino83 said:


> It's interesting to know that the meanings of ある and だ partially overlapped in classical texts.


Yes. I can even give you an example. The first sentence from Hojoki (方丈記) runs like this:
　行く河の流れは絶えずして、しかも、もとの水にあらず。(The flow of the moving river never ceases, yet it is not the original water.)
It's a sentiment similar to "you cannot step into the same river twice". The にあらず at the end is a copulative expression that means ではない. While in the third sentence:
　世の中にある人と栖と、またかくのごとし。(People and houses that are in this world are also like this.)
This にある just has its usual meaning, to exist somewhere (Classical Japanese does not differentiate between animate and inanimate).


----------



## Nino83

Thank you for the examples, ktdd.
This text seems to be dated 1212 AD. Does anyone know during which period the meanings of these two verbs started diverging? 
(I don't know if we are still in topic)


----------

