# at / in a restaurant



## ROBJOLO

Are this sentences with the correct preposition?

We are going to lunch at an Italian restaurant.
We are going to lunch in a restaurant.


Thanks in advanced advance.


----------



## englishfreak

From "The Question Box":
You may dine *in or at a restaurant*. We say 'John works in that office' but 'Father is at the office'.
Sí que parece haber un matiz de diferencia entre ambos, pero no sabría explicarlo yo y en cualquier caso no me parece importante.

Creo que lo más común es decir "have lunch" o "eat lunch" en lugar de usar "lunch" como verbo...
Y creo que es "Thanks in advance" (por adelantado). Advanced es como "avanzado".
¡Suerte! I hate prepositions with a passion.


----------



## Zio Gilito

En el colegio los profesores de inglés siempre dicen que ambas preposiciones son intercambiables, aunque ellos no son nativos normalmente...
Esperemos que algún nativo pueda explicar el matiz del que habla englishfreak


----------



## jinti

englishfreak said:


> From "The Question Box":
> You may dine *in or at a restaurant*. We say 'John works in that office' but 'Father is at the office'.
> Sí que parece haber un matiz de diferencia entre ambos, pero no sabría explicarlo yo y en cualquier caso no me parece importante.
> El único matiz que veo es que solemos decir _at _si identificamos un restaurante (o cualquier lugar) específico.
> 
> Por ejemplo:
> 
> _We had lunch *in *a restaurant.
> We had lunch *at *a restaurant.
> 
> We had lunch *in *Sago Café.
> We had lunch *at *Sago Café. _
> 
> 
> ¡Suerte! I hate prepositions with a passion. Poor, sad, unwanted prepositions....


----------



## Bevj

'We are going to lunch' is frequently heard in BrE and I don't think that 'lunch' is used here as a verb; rather it's the same as saying  'We are going to a concert'.


----------



## Thomas1

¡Hola!

Eso es un pasaje de mi manuel de gramática _A Practical English Grammar _de A. J. Thomson y A. V. Martinet:We can be in a country, a town, a village, a square, a street, a room, a forest, a wood, a field, a desert or any place which has boundaries or is enclosed.                  
But a small area such as a square, a street, a room, a field might be used with *at *when we mean 'at this point' rather than 'inside'. We can be in or at a building, *in *means inside only; *at *could mean inside or in the grounds or just outside. If someone is 'at the station' he could be in the street outside, or in the ticket office/waiting room/restaurant or on the platform.​ 
Quizás arroje un poco de luz sobre at y in.


----------



## englishfreak

So I guess meet me at such and such restaurant, but I had lunch in that restaurant? 

Could you say "I had lunch at the restaurant" just to mark that you did not have it, say, at your office or anything like that?

That was very clarifying, anyway.


----------



## Thomas1

I think that _at a restaurant_ has a broader meaning:
_I had lunch at a restaurant. _means that you could have had it either inside the restaurant or outside it in the tea garden, for example.


----------



## ROBJOLO

My doubt is still unresolved.


----------



## k-in-sc

"Going to lunch at a restaurant" sounds better.
You don't want to say "*going* to lunch *in* a restaurant."  Are you *going* there or are you already *inside*? You can't be both.  
But you can say "going to *have *lunch *at* or *in* a restaurant" or "going to a restaurant *for lunch*." 
What you definitely should avoid is using "lunch" as a verb, as others have said, or any construction that might even sound as if you were using it as a verb (another problem with "*going* to lunch *in* a restaurant"  = "planning to lunch in a restaurant"?) 
Bottom line: Stick with "at" por las dudas and remember that "lunch" is a noun!


----------



## e-hime

k-in-sc said:


> "Going to lunch at a restaurant" sounds better.
> You don't want to say "*going* to lunch *in* a restaurant."  Are you *going* there or are you already *inside*? You can't be both.
> But you can say "going to *have *lunch *at* or *in* a restaurant" or "going to a restaurant *for lunch*."
> What you definitely should avoid is using "lunch" as a verb, as others have said, or any construction that might even sound as if you were using it as a verb (another problem with "*going* to lunch *in* a restaurant"  = "planning to lunch in a restaurant"?)
> Bottom line: Stick with "at" por las dudas and remember that "lunch" is a noun!


thank you!!! i'll never forget it this way ^^ At least with the restaurant, because itr seems if it's a proper name the thing changes...?


----------



## k-in-sc

"At" works with the name of the restaurant too.

So just forget about ''in."

Provecho!


----------



## e-hime

Maybe this will help 

e*AT* *AT* a restaurant
e*AT* *AT* Ginno's

Gracias k-in-sc!


----------



## k-in-sc

for a diner/truck stop:

''Eat at Joe's and Get Gas''


----------



## ROBJOLO

k-in-sc said:


> "Going to lunch at a restaurant" sounds better.
> You don't want to say "*going* to lunch *in* a restaurant." Are you *going* there or are you already *inside*? You can't be both.
> But you can say "going to *have *lunch *at* or *in* a restaurant" or "going to a restaurant *for lunch*."
> What you definitely should avoid is using "lunch" as a verb, as others have said, or any construction that might even sound as if you were using it as a verb (another problem with "*going* to lunch *in* a restaurant" = "planning to lunch in a restaurant"?)
> Bottom line: Stick with "at" por las dudas and remember that "lunch" is a noun!


 

Muchas gracias

So, 'we are going to have lunch at a restaurant', 'we are going to have lunch in a restaurant' and 'we are going to have lunch at an Italian restaurant' are corrects. And 'we are going to have lunch in an Italian restaurant' is incorrect.


----------



## k-in-sc

"We are _*going to* *have *_lunch _in_ an Italian restaurant" sounds fine.
"We are *going to lunch* _in_ an Italian restaurant" is what sounds a little odd.
It has to do with whether "going to" represents time or space.
Does it mean "in the future" or "in a place to which we will go"?
When you put in "have," then the meaning is clearly "in the future" and it sounds fine.
Sorry if it's confusing!


----------



## Meyer Wolfsheim

ROBJOLO said:


> Are this sentences with the correct preposition?
> 
> We are going to have lunch at an Italian restaurant.
> We are going to have lunch in a restaurant.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advanced advance.


 
Aunque español tiene unos verbos como "almorzarse" o "comerse el almuerzo", inglés usa "to have lunch" (tener almuerzo) para experesar la acción de almorzarse.  

En inglés, puede ser dificil que decidas usar una preposición.  Verdaderamente, no hay mucha diferencía entre las dos pero existe.  

Generalmente, "in" indica dentro de un lugar: Estamos *en* el edificio=We are *in* the building.  Es muy precisa; si dices que "We are *in *the restaurant", quieres decir que estás *en* el restaurante.  

Sin embargo, "at" quiere decir cerca de un lugar o que estás próximo de él.  "We are *at* the restaurant" no significa siempre que estás en el restaurante pero que estás muy cerca de él: quizá estés en el aparcamiento o te sientes fuera.


----------



## ROBJOLO

Muchas gracias a todos.


----------



## elhombrestan

Ejercicio cuidado cuando te usas "at" en inglés.  

Hablar generalmente:  no usas "at" al fin de una frase....

Por ejemplo:  "Where is John at?"  --->incorrecto
                  "Where is John?"  ---->correcto


----------



## Tazzler

I prefer _at_ in the examples with restaurants that have been given because emphasis is not on being _inside_ the building but rather "_near" _it or "around" it. Obviously you would say _at_ instead of those prepositions but with _at_ you don't necessarily at once think of being inside a place.


----------



## Meyer Wolfsheim

elhombrestan said:


> Ejercicio cuidado cuando te usas "at" en inglés.
> 
> Hablar generalmente: no usas "at" al fin de una frase....
> 
> Por ejemplo: "Where is John at?" --->incorrecto
> "Where is John?" ---->correcto


 
No estoy de acuerdo contigo.  Creo que "Where is John at" es correcto.


----------



## k-in-sc

"Where is John at?" is as correct as "I ain't got none" and "Me and Tommy are going to the store."
;-)


----------



## englishfreak

I've heard where're u at? many times. Is that wrong?


----------



## Thomas1

Something that may be interesting: Where are you in/at.


----------



## Barbara S.

This is what sounds right to me: Do you want to have lunch in a restaurant or shall we order some pizza? We ate at Burger King yesterday. I am originally from New York, and that's how we talked there. Things might have changed.


----------



## gbl_gnz

Hola. tengo una duda con este tema porque las preposiciones son confusas. ¿Cuál es la preposición de lugar correcta en este ejemplo?: 

We are going to eat/meet *in */* at* a restaurant.


----------



## chamyto

Hola, digamos que _in _es dentro del local, o dentro del área destinada para los comensales y _at_ sería más bien al lado de la puerta de la entrada al local.

Un ejemplo sencillo:

We have met at the post office, in XXX street.


----------



## FromPA

"In" is more specific than "at."  "In" specifies "dentro del local" as chamyto has indicated, whereas "at" does not specify inside or outside, only that you are in the proximity of the location.  If you are "at" a location, you could be inside or outside; it is not specified.


----------



## pete mccutcheon

In the example above, I would use  "...ON XXX street."


----------



## Socal3661

pete mccutcheon said:


> In the example above, I would use  "...ON XXX street."




Agree!


----------



## juan2937

Bevj said:


> 'We are going to lunch' is frequently heard in BrE and I don't think that 'lunch' is used here as a verb; rather it's the same as saying  'We are going to a concert'.



The way I learned it was like this

SPACE
AT one dimension seen as a point in space. 

1.- Someone is *at the door,* the car was waiting *at the lights.*

2.--I'm *AT the restaurant* ( in front or outside) when you open the door and you enter  then you are 'IN'
 Met someone  AT an event (past reference) , we met *at *Tim's birthday party ( meeting point)let's meet at the club =(meeting point) I first met your father at Harrods ( meeting Point) He is a student at Oxford ( a point of study)
3..- *At the theatre* (=watching a play) Normal purpose of a building or activity that happens there.
we bought these dishes at the *supermarket *(normal purpose  of the building)
Nichola is fifteen. She's still *at school*. ( normal purpose of a building)
3. *at *someone's flat/house
we are *at Angela's flat/house.*
4.- Before group of activities
*At a party*, *at a meeting*, *at a concert,* *at a lecture,* *at the match* ( point of events)
as a *point*, *stage *on a *journey *the plane stops at Frankfurt ( *a point on a journey*).


----------

