# Locative -ni vs. -de; で, に



## Flaminius

Japanese has two postpositions to express the concept of locative, or the place in which the action takes place.  One postposition _-de_ is used profusely with most verbs.

図書館で勉強する。
toshokan-de benkyō-suru.
library-LOCATIVE study-DO.
Study in the library.


Another postposition _-ni_ is used for a limited set of verbs.

鎌倉市に住んでいる。
kamakurashi-ni sunde-iru.
KamakuraCity-LOCATIVE live-PROGRESSIVE.
Live in Kamakura City.

大企業に勤める
Work in a big company.

ホテルに泊まる。
Stay in a hotel.

Whew, I am beginning to think that the verbs claiming _-ni_ locative are not a limited group.  Is there a rule of thumb to tell verbs for the first group from those for the second one?  I hereby take the liberty of asking the opinions of my fellow posters.

Flam


----------



## Sulizhen

It's interesting what you wrote because when I started to study Japanese, I was told that the difference between "ni" and "de" as locative particles depended on the action expressed by the verb, and not on the verb itself. So, "ni" was used to indicate a place where someone or something physically stands or exists, while "de" indicates the place where something takes place. To say it in other words, "de" was related to "dynamic" actions and verbs, while  "ni" was linked to something more... "static".
And sample sentences always were like these (I'm sorry for not writing with kanas and kanjis, but I have some problems with my Windows language pack...):

-Maiasa, sentaa *de* benkyoushimasu.
-Ano kissaten *de* biiru o nonda.

and:

-Tanaka san wa niwa *ni* imasu.
-Tanaka san ga Sapporo *ni* sunde imasu.

I don't know whether they are different ways to explain the same thing, although I must say that my teacher of Japanese was Spanish and not a native speaker, so maybe it was easier for her to explain it this way...


----------



## jazyk

> So, "ni" was used to indicate a place where someone or something physically stands or exists, while "de" indicates the place where something takes place. To say it in other words, "de" was related to "dynamic" actions and verbs, while "ni" was linked to something more... "static".


I learned the exact same thing, but I've found a few so called "incongruences": Koujou de hataraku/Koujou ni tsutomeru. I work in a factory.


----------



## Flaminius

It once seemed to me that transitive verbs take _-de_ and intransitives _-ni_.  Yet the pair below related by *jazyk* captured me in rapture...  



jazyk said:


> I learned the exact same thing, but I've found a few so called "incongruences": Koujou de hataraku/Koujou ni tsutomeru. I work in a factory.


----------



## Sulizhen

Could it be a matter of nuances? (and I'm asking now, because it's a guess and not an affirmation) I mean, could it be possible that, even if both sentences mean the same, one can be translated as "I work in..." and other as "I work for..."?  I know it can sound stupid but...


----------



## Flaminius

Right, there is certainly a role for nuances.

The difference between _hataraku_ and _tsutomeru_ is that the former focuses on the specific acts of working (such as making photocopies, calling up customers etc.) whereas the latter denotes that the subject of the verb belong to a certain company, place, office and make a living.  One illustration of the latter's nuance is 勤め人 (tsutome-nin), meaning wage-earner.

This analysis leads me to yet anther hypothesis.  Verbs denoting actions take _-de_ postposition to indicate, "something is taking place somewhere" whereas verbs denoting the state or an attribute of the subject take _-ni_ postposition to indicate, "someone belongs to somewhere in a certain manner (by way of inhabitation, sitting, standing or being on the payroll)."

Are we getting somewhere?

Flam


----------



## Sulizhen

I see. For me, since I'm still a beginner and have not found complex structures already, means getting back to the start, more or less... I've always used the "rule" I wrote first ("de"-->something happens or takes place, "ni"-->something stands or exists); but I like the way you explain it, you make it easier to understand 

P.S. Kind of off-topic: about "hataraku" and "tsutomeru". Then "hataraku" is related to physical, factual work (action) while "tsutomeru" is more related to the fact of earning a living, ne?


----------



## SpiceMan

I'm not sure, but I always though of the difference like this:

Saying "toyota de hataraiteiru"  is akin to "I work at Toyota" in that it only states where you work, while saying "toyota ni tsutometeiru" is akin to "I'm from Toyota", which implies some kind of backing from the company to your actions, and a deeper commitment from you towards the company.

Although, actual usage of "I'm from X" and "X ni tsutometeiru" do not correspond 100%, thinking about these verbs that way surely helped me.

Other verbs that need "ni" are the ones that somewhat denote existence. Kurasu, sumu, tomaru, etc.


----------



## Flaminius

I think the basic meaning of つとめる independent of _-ni_ adjunct is to strive continuously in one place.  This is one of the reasons おつとめ is a jargon for doing one's time in penal servitude.  


> "tsutomeru" is more related to the fact of earning a living





> saying "toyota ni tsutometeiru" is akin to "I'm from Toyota"


Both senses seem to me seamlessly derived from the above.  As _-ni_ postposition implies a static attribution or belonging, both sentences should use _-ni_ in order to express where one is earning a living or where one belongs and has a deep commitment.


----------



## jp_fr_linguaphile

And of course there is the difference between ぼくは大阪で生まれたand 貧しい家庭に生まれた.  I was born in Osaka BUT I was born to a poor family.


----------



## AesSedai

jp_fr_linguaphile said:


> And of course there is the difference between ぼくは大阪で生まれたand 貧しい家庭に生まれた.  I was born in Osaka BUT I was born to a poor family.




Precisely.  I think that this may better help explain the difference between 'ni' and 'de'.  When you say "Oosaka de umareta" you literally mean that Oosaka is the place where the 'being born' took place.  When you say 'Mazusii katee ni umareta" you do not mean that as the place where the action took place; rather, the place where, after the action being completed, you continued to 'exist'.  

In tutomeru vs. hataraku, I believe the difference to be similar.  With tutomeru, the 'state of being employed at' a company is more important than the fact that you truly 'work' there.   


The concept of 'existence' or 'stativeness' (is that a word?) vs. location where an action takes place is also seen in the following examples:

Otearai wa nikai ni arimasu.
Kaigi/Party wa nikai de arimasu.

The first indicates where the restrooms are located (exist). The second one indicates where the conference/party is taking place.  Both sentences use "arimasu" which is normally associated with "ni" instead of "de".


----------



## youtin

I have another question to ask about に and で which continue to elude me.

Countless times I have been stumped by sentences like this:

ここ*に*　座ってください。
ここ*で*　座ってください。

友達の家*に*　泊まる。
友達の家*で*　泊まる。

I was told both に and で in the above examples are grammatical, but they couldn't explain to me what the difference was. Also, I used to say 「日本で留学した」 but I heard a Japanese use 「に」 in that sentence so that must be the correct one. Why isn't 留学する an action that warrants the use of で？


----------



## jp_fr_linguaphile

With で the focus is more on the verb whereas with　に the focus is more on the location, in my opinion.  

Note the focus in your sample sentences below:

ここ*に*　座ってください。 Where will you sit?  Here.
ここ*で*　座ってください。 What will you do here?  Sit


----------



## Aoyama

Try to find Oreste Vaccari's Japanese language method (4 volumes), published in 1937 (!). Vaccari was an Italian missionary (who eventually married a Japanese wife- Enko Elisa) who came to Japan in 1929, having studied Japanese at Naples Institute of Asian Languages.
His method of Japanese is very interesting (though a bit outdated)_ because he uses latin as the reference language, trying to fit Japanese particles (_*no,ni,de,ha,wo,he,to,ka...*_) into latin flexion and declension (nominative, vocative etc)._ You may find some answer to your question.



_Tokyo: Vaccari, 1951 Hard Cover. Very Good/Good. 9th Edition, Revised & Enlarged. Edges of cover worn; corners of a few pages bent; dust jacket has several large, many small tears & chips._ (second hand, reprint of pre-war edition)
Vaccari, Oreste & Vaccari, Enko Elisa - Complete Course of Japanese conversation-Grammar (Google)


----------



## shiremono

Hi/Konnichiwa

日本*に*留学した Nihon *ni* ryuugaku shita.

> Why isn't 留学する an action that warrants the use of で？

Because *に* *ni* in this sentence indicates "direction" as well as "location".
Just like 日本に行った Nihon *ni* itta. 
"留学する ryugaku suru" implies the meaning "to go". 

This should be another basic usage of *ni に*.


----------



## cheshire

I agree. 入学する、留学する、入社する、入信する　all require "ni" because the verbs indicate direction.

福岡大学に入学する
UCLAに留学する
トヨタに入社する
カトリックに入信する。


----------



## Flaminius

youtin said:


> Countless times I have been stumped by sentences like this:
> 
> ここ*に*　座ってください。
> ここ*で*　座ってください。
> 
> 友達の家*に*　泊まる。
> 友達の家*で*　泊まる。
> 
> (. . .) Also, I used to say 「日本で留学した」 but I heard a Japanese use 「に」 in that sentence so that must be the correct one. Why isn't 留学する an action that warrants the use of で？



The verbs 座る, 泊まる, 留学する warrant particle _-ni_ because they focus on the resulting state of the action performed.  E.g., 留学する is literally _to stay and study (in a foreign country)_.  The nouns marked by _-ni_ are not the locale wherein the action takes place but the goal towards which the action unfolds.  For example, 日本に留学する is, "go to Japan and study there."

I don't think _-de_ can replace _-ni_ in all cases but at least ここで座ってください is a grammatical, though peculiar, usage.  This sentence has the connotation that "sitting here" is only one of the action that the hearer is asked to perform.  Let's assume a director is instructing an actor for his 5-minute part.  He would say, "Please enter the scene from the left side, then walk up to the sofa."  "ここで座ってください (Sit down at this point of time [or at this point in the sequence])。  Kanae waves at you.  Then, half rise from the sofa and turn around."


----------



## youtin

Thanks for the explanations, everyone!

I see the problem now, I thought of 留学する as the _act_ of studying in a foreign country, not going and being there.

So 友達の家*で*　泊まる is ungrammatical? I specifically remember asking a Japaese whether to use に or で here and he said "it depends". So maybe he was wrong? ま、日本語下手くそって言ってたから ^^;


----------



## Flaminius

> So 友達の家*で*　泊まる is ungrammatical?


Perhaps it is not ungrammatical in the strictest sense of the word but rather hard to interpret.  For an ordinary question such as 「昨日はどこにいたの」 (Where were you yesterday?), the most typical answer to mean, "I stayed with a friend" is 「友達の家に泊まったの」.  Right now I cannot think of a situation where using _-de _in this sentence is viable.


----------



## cheshire

1.友達の家*で*　泊まる​2.友達の家に　泊まる​I'd say it is perfectly OK to use で there, youtin, and your friend was right: it depends on the context.

If you've learned German it is really easy to explain: 1 is an example of "dative" (in dem Haus..., in der Bank) while 2 is for "accusative" (in die Bank, ins Museum). Some verbs can't take the dative form (in Japanese grammar, it's the particle で ), so you have to be careful. For example, 入学する、入社する　can't take the で form as already explained. Other verbs can take both. Some verbs can't take the に form.



> ここで座ってください


I'd say this is strange, if not ungrammatical. 座る　is a verb that indicates the occurence of a one-time action, not duration. 座る is mostly used not for the sake of action itself, but the result or state of the action. Hence, ここで座って*いて*ください　or ここ*に*座ってください is the sentence you want.


----------



## Aoyama

> If you've learned German it is really easy to explain: 1 is an example of *"dative"* (in dem Haus..., in der Bank) while 2 is for *"accusative"* (in die Bank, ins Museum). Some verbs can't take the dative form (in Japanese grammar, it's the particle で ),


True, in a way (though Latin might work here better than German), but rather then dative and accusative I would think it should be *ablative *(locative _per se_ does not exist in latin).


----------



## flightyan

Hi. Thank you for allowing me to write down my post here. I've been studying japanese since this Jan. I just learned about the suffix で / に as indicating directions(places). 

My teachure said that で is usually used after the palces where events are made. and に is also used after places but where something/someone exist or not. for example. 

ここに五人人がいます　：　Here are 5 people.
ここで五人人が勉強しています　：　で 5 People are studying here.

The above examples are fine well. But the matters come when I try to use で in the following sentence.

僕は大阪で住みたいです：　Wrong　
いつソウルで帰りますか？ : Wrong.

These two sentences, well, are made of my own. I though the verbs "live(sumu)" and "go back(ka e ru) were events. 

Is there any clear explanation to determine to use de or ni in various situation?

Thank you for your kind help.


----------



## Ocham

Your teacher's rule applies to most cases. But the two sentences below, 
for example, have one meaning in common: I want to live in Osaka.

1) 僕は大阪*に*住みたいです。right
2) 僕は大阪*で*暮らしたいです。right

In 1), *に* still has its original meaning "*to*(ward)", because we never say so 
when we are *in* Osaka. Just like you say 大阪*に*行きたいです( I want to go *to* 
Osaka.), you must be outside Osaka. However, you can say 2) wherever 
you are. It doesn't matter whether you are *in* or outside Osaka.


----------



## flightyan

Thank you for your kind advice,ocham. If possible, could you kindly recommend me any useful examples on that case? I think it's better for me to memorize them case by case :-> Anyway your answer is very helpful to me.


----------



## Lupen The Third

*Moderator Note:
Branched from this thread.*

Good morning,
On a forum I translated the sentence  

"I heard (that) English Teachers in Japan make a lot of money" .

Remembering the things that I've learnt here thanks to you all, I wrote :
私は英語の先生が日本にたくさんのお金を儲けると聞きました.

But, on that forum, the 日本に has been corrected in 日本で... |私は英語の先生が日本でたくさんのお金を儲けると聞きました.|

Thinking back to my first sentence posted in this thread "私は日本に"Ｘ"と言う映画があると聞きました。" , I'm asking to myself :

Why in the sentence |私は日本に"Ｘ"と言う映画があると聞きました| the 日本に is acceptable and in the |私は英語の先生が日本にたくさんのお金を儲けると聞きました| phrase not?

Somebody has got any idea? Which is your opion?
Yoroshiku onegai shimasu.


----------



## Derselbe

I see why you're asking this question. It's somewhat confusing and I'm not sure if I can give you a suitable explaination. 

I depends on the verb. ある and 儲ける are somewhat different. In English the question is always "where":
*Where *is the airport? -> It is *in *Tokio
*Where *is the money being earned? -> It is being earned *in *Japan.

But in Japanese there is a difference between the two. The former is　所にある, the latter 所でする. As I said I can't really give you a good explaination, but try to think about it this way (maybe it helps).
In the airport sentence, it wouldn't make much sense if you omitted the "in Tokio" part. So the place is essential for that sentence. The verb ある basically describes that something is existent and the question is always "where". You can call it a verb directly calling for a place.

But the other sentence is perfectly fine even without information as to where the action has taken place: "English teachers earn a lot of money" You don't need to answer the question "where" to make it a valid sentence. So the information about the place is more an additional information (in terms of grammar - of course for the meaning it can be essential). For this kind of information Japanese often uses "で". It also decribes the means by which something is done. 
e.g.
箸*で*食べます。　
食堂*で*たべます。
But:
箸はテーブルの上*に*あります。
ポールさんは食堂*に*います。

The first two: You can choose wherever you want to eat. The place is more like a means of doing it. Try to think of it this way: You can transfer "I eat in the dying hall" to "I eat *by* using the dining hall." just like "I eat using chopsticks." So it's で

But you can not transfer "I am in the dining hall" to "I am *by* using the dining hall".
Do you see the difference?

However, I find you sentence a little bit hard to understand　(plus, I am not sure if たくさん*の*お金 is correct Japanese)
私は英語の先生が日本でたくさんのお金を儲けると聞きました
I think you can simplify it to
英語の先生は日本でお金をたくさん儲けると聞きました。or
日本では、英語を教えている先生の給料が多いそうです。


----------



## SpiceMan

Lupen The Third said:


> Why in the sentence |私は日本に"Ｘ"と言う映画があると聞きました| the 日本に is acceptable and in the |私は英語の先生が日本にたくさんのお金を儲けると聞きました| phrase not?


Because, just like prepositions, particles( a.k.a. postpositions) have a correspondence with the verb of the sentence.

儲ける and ある are different verbs and have different correspondent particles.

You've surely learned "ここに車（くるま）がある".
It's just the same with "日本にXと言う映画がある”. 

You've surely learned "ここで働く（はたらく）".
It's just the same with "日本で儲ける".

That said, I would have said *日本の*Xと言う映画があると聞きました。 (ie: "There's a japanese movie called X" rather than "there's a movie called X in Japan"... and without "私は", 95% of the time it is unneeded).


----------



## lrosa

I am always a little tempted to use で instead of に in these kinds of circumstances (an action taking part in a given place), but I have realised, as has already been suggested, that some verbs are only (or at least, most of the time) used with に. So far, the most common that I have come across are ある、　いる、　住む、　and 留学する. I feel that for the most part, it is safe to use で for all other verbs, but it would be great if anyone could add any more.

(One other notable exception that I have come across is when referring to an action taking place within a building, room, train, etc., where the construction 電車*の中で* is often used to express the environment in which an action takes place)

PS: In the case of ある, for example, I have come to see that the use of に is essential to avoid confusion with である, which is equivalent to だ or です in meaning.


----------



## Lupen The Third

Oh guys thank you very much! All valid replies!

The answers are very exhaustive, and now I got the differences!

@Derselbe: takusan no okane>

I'm quite sure that this is correct Japanese. One day a nihonjin said that "takusan no X" means literally "a lot of X".

Takusan no koto = A lot of things...

Thank you for your suggestions,
Minasan doumo arigatou gozaimasu!


----------



## Derselbe

Lupen The Third said:


> @Derselbe: takusan no okane>
> 
> I'm quite sure that this is correct Japanese. One day a nihonjin said that "takusan no X" means literally "a lot of X".
> 
> Takusan no koto = A lot of things...



You're right. takusan no X is in fact correct Japanese.
But actually I don't hear people saying it very much. To me it seems that 
"okane ga takusan aru" is more natural than "takusan no okane ga aru".
I am going to open a new thread on this.


----------



## Dheara

Lupen The Third

"[COLOR=Red said:
			
		

> I heard (that) [/COLOR]English Teachers in Japan make a lot of money" .
> 
> Remembering the things that I've learnt here thanks to you all, I wrote :
> 私は英語の先生が日本にたくさんのお金を儲けると聞きました.
> 
> But, on that forum, the 日本に has been corrected in 日本で... |私は英語の先生が日本でたくさんのお金を儲けると聞きました.|
> 
> Thinking back to my first sentence posted in this thread "私は日本に"Ｘ"と言う映画があると聞きました。" , I'm asking to myself :
> 
> Why in the sentence |私は日本に"Ｘ"と言う映画があると聞きました| the 日本に is acceptable and in the |私は英語の先生が日本にたくさんのお金を儲けると聞きました| phrase not?
> 
> Somebody has got any idea? Which is your opion?
> Yoroshiku onegai shimasu.



Hi!
First of all, you use に in order to express the place where SOMEBODY or SOMETHING EXISTS/IS, and this can be expressed in 2 ways:

1. Location に + Noun が　+ います・あります
　　　　　あそこに人が居る。There is a person in that place (over there).
　　　　　ここに学校がある。
2. Noun(topic) は　+　Location に　＋　います・あります。
　　　　　人はあそこにいる。The person is over there.
　　　　　学校はここにある。

_日本にたくさんのお金を儲ける_　- the clause dosn:t show that SOmething exists in a place, but that something Happens, takes place

_日本に"Ｘ"と言う映画がある_ - ～がある usually expresses Existence of an object, 映画 is seen as an object

日本に‘‘X‘‘と言う先生がいる。　There is a teacher named... who is in Japan.
日本に住んでいる‘‘X‘‘と言う先生がいる。
but
日本の学校で働いている‘‘X‘‘と言う先生がいる。　
is a different matter... is not about the location where something/someone exists


----------



## Steven2

Does レストランに昼ご飯を食べた make sense?  I know レストランで昼ご飯を食べた makes sense.
How about 映画に見た銀行に行った instead of 映画で見た銀行に行った?


----------



## Wishfull

Hi.
レストランに昼ご飯を食べた 
レストランで昼ご飯を食べた 
レストランに昼ご飯を食べに行った

映画に見た銀行に行った
映画で見た銀行に行った
映画で見た銀行へ行った

夢に見た銀行に行った
＝夢見ていた銀行に行った


----------



## Flaminius

Dheara said:


> _日本にたくさんのお金を儲ける_　- the clause dosn:t show that SOmething exists in a place, but that something Happens, takes place


Hello, *Dheara*.

Welcome to the forums!  Please look around and have a lot of language fun and learning.

Now, the quoted sentence is ungrammatical (as corrected by *Derselbe* in #26 _supra_): 日本*で*儲ける

The reason for the correction is exactly what you stated.  As the verb 儲ける is an action, the location where it takes place should not use に, which is for more static meanings.


----------



## Dheara

Hello, Flaminius. Thank you.



> 日本にたくさんのお金を儲ける　- the clause dosn:t show that SOmething exists in a place, but that something Happens, takes place



I forgot to write that the sentence was ungrammatical, but I supposed it could be understood from my explanations (post#31)... sometimes I don`t express clearly what I mean...


----------



## AmaryllisBunny

1) 図書館で本を読みました。
2) 図書館に本を読みました。

In example 2, the teacher I've been working with states it is wrong. However, a previous teacher told me that both 「に」＆「で」are fine. Is there a consensus on this?


----------



## Shiratori99

I'm pretty sure #2 is wrong. Did you (or your teacher) maybe confuse it with にて?


----------



## AmaryllisBunny

Thanks for the confirmation Shiratori, that's what I was looking for  .


----------



## Shiratori99

AmaryllisBunny said:


> Thanks for the confirmation Shiratori, that's what I was looking for  .



No problem. Better let a native speaker confirm it though ^^


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

I agree with Shiratori99.
2 is just wrong. It doesn't make sense.
I strongly suspect that the teacher was a non-native Japanese speaker.


----------



## AmaryllisBunny

SoLaTiDoberman said:


> I agree with Shiratori99.
> 2 is just wrong. It doesn't make sense.
> I strongly suspect that the teacher was a non-native Japanese speaker.



She is definitely a native speaker. However, I must have heard her wrong (this was many years ago).


----------



## wind-sky-wind

The difference between "に" and "で" expressing places is difficult for non-native speakers, even if they are excellent in Japanese.

... live in Tokyo. 東京*に*住んでいる。
... was born in Tokyo. 東京*で*生まれた。（東京*に*生まれる　in the biographical way)
... read books in the library. 図書館*で*本を読む。

Native speakers, at least I, can't explain the difference between them, both of which mean "in" or "at" in English.
Just they say so.


----------



## AmaryllisBunny

It seems to be that "で" is static whereas "に" is more active. 

Thank you for your explanation wind-sky-wind.


----------



## Shiratori99

wind-sky-wind said:


> The difference between "に" and "で" expressing places is difficult for non-native speakers, even if they are excellent in Japanese.
> 
> ... live in Tokyo. 東京*に*住んでいる。
> ... was born in Tokyo. 東京*で*生まれた。（東京*に*生まれる　in the biographical way)
> ... read books in the library. 図書館*で*本を読む。
> 
> Native speakers, at least I, can't explain the difference between them, both of which mean "in" or "at" in English.
> Just they say so.



I thought I had a solid grasp on them, but now you confused me lol.


----------



## AmaryllisBunny

Could you explain the difference between  東京で生まれた and   東京に生まれた? I fail to see much of a difference, as either static or active seems appropriate.


----------



## wind-sky-wind

Native speakers don't wonder if it's static or active.
You can't explain the difference between "に" and "で" just accoding to whether it's static or active.

ベッド*で*寝ている。ベッドの上*に*（or *で*）寝ている。
京都*で*暮らしている。京都*に*住んでいる。

Anyway, both mean "in" or "at."
In fact, in every English-Japanse dictonary, "in" or "at" is defined both as "に" and "で."


----------



## AmaryllisBunny

According to http://ejje.weblio.jp,
住む (live 《in, at》; inhabit 《a place》; 【形式ばった表現】 dwell [reside] 《in, at》) implies use of a preposition whereas 
暮らす (〈生活する〉 live; make a [one's] living; earn [get, make] a livelihood) doesn't.

Perhaps this could be why as well?

With direction, they can always be followed by に which allows for "...上に寝ている." 

Of course this is how a non-native such as myself would look at it to try to rationalize it in some way.


----------



## 森人さん

What is the difference between ni and de? For example, sotoni, sotode, nakani, nakade?  Thanks.


----------



## karlalou

外に(sotoni) is used either like 外に行く (go outside) or 外にある (it is/exists outside).
外で(sotode) is used as 外で働く (work outside) or 外で歌う (sing outside).

I can't generalize anything, but part of the usages of に is to indicate the recipient of the verb or the indirect object of the verb. When it's a place such as 'outside' に indicates the destination of the move described by the verb. On the other hand, one usage of で(de) is to indicate a place where the event described by the predicate happens.


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

naka*de* =*in* the inside, *at* the inside
naka*ni* = *to* the inside,* into* the inside

soto*de*= *in* the outside, *at* the outside
soto*ni *=* to* the outside, *into* the outside

De indicates the location where something takes place.
Ni indicates the direction, destination. 

今日、デパート*で(de)*ランチを食べる。I'll have lunch *at* the department store today.
今日、デパート*に(ni)*行く。I'll go *to* the department store today.


----------



## Schokolade

In general,

で indicates* the location where an action takes place*, whereas
に indicates *the direction/destination of an action/motion*.

Also note that に indicates *the location where something exists *when used with verbs that indicate existence, such as いる, ある, 住む, etc.

-----

Basic formulae:

「location + *で* + action verb」="do something *in/at* location" eg そと*で*待つ (wait outside)
「location +* に* + motion verb」="move *to* location" eg そと*に*出る (go outside)
「location + *に* + verb of existence」="exist/be *in *location" eg そと*に*いる (stay outside)


----------



## 森人さん

Thanks everybody.


----------



## thetazuo

Hi. Could I ask another question?
Can we use the following versions?
*それで*は細かな線が幾つも走っており
この電線*で*電気が通っている
If not, why?

Moderator Note: moved from here.


----------



## Flaminius

Postposition _-de_ cannot express the entirety of the range wherein an action or a state holds true.  You need _-ni_ to mean, "through out."  Diagrams for sketching the meaning of_ -de_ are:
belt-like thing called それ---> _________線________ <--- それ
この--->_________電気_________<---電線

, whereas you want to say something like below.
それ--->線線線線線線線線線線線線線<---それ
この--->電気電気電気電気電気電気電気電気<---電線


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you. I see.


----------



## jonnymind

jazyk said:


> I learned the exact same thing, but I've found a few so called "incongruences": Koujou de hataraku/Koujou ni tsutomeru. I work in a factory.


Adding to Sola, and recalling from my early lessons, with koujou ni tsutomeru you render the idea that you employed at a factory (And so, you perform some activities there), while with Koujou de hataraku you render the idea that you perform an activity inside the factory (because you are employed there). The message conveyed is the same, but when you use “ni“ (and verbs paired with it), what flashes in the mind of the listener is the idea of a state of things, while with “de”, the idea flashing has a dynamic component. This, even if the final meaning is totally the same.
The final destination may be the same, what changes is the pathway traversed to make that concept to emerge.


----------



## Flaminius

jonnymind said:


> Adding to Sola


You are basing your arguments on *jazyk*, and *Sulizhen*, who is quoted in the original of your quote.

工場に勤める。
工場で働く。
The latent difference of the two verbs can be exposed by adding time expressions.

OK 工場で2時間働く。
* 工場に2時間勤める。

The employment sense of _tsutomeru_ is pretty incongruous with a short time period like 2 hours.


----------

