2230
Today I heard 人形がいる, so I googled around because I thought 居る was only for
living things, but I found many examples of this usage. Many for 人形がある as
well.

Are there other exceptions for いる／ある？
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-07-27T00:09:07.397
2228
2015-12-14T00:12:17.200
2015-12-14T00:12:17.200
54
question
usage irregularities-exceptions personification
What are some well known exceptions for 居る (いる) and 有る (ある)?
One such exception is that Taxis get いる.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-07-27T00:41:24.557
2229
2011-07-27T00:41:24.557
97
2228
answer
In your case, it can be simply an instance of personification. That is,
metaphorically handling an inanimate thing as if it were animate. That is easy
to imagine with 'doll'. If that is the case, then this is not an exception but
is simply a rhethoric.

A case where an inanimate thing can take `いる` is when that thing is inherently
mobile, and is used within the context as such. For example, if you are
looking at a time table, and found a train that you can take, then you can say

> 電車がある

but if you were running into the station to catch a train that may have left
already, but you made to it in the last moment and there is a train in front
of you, then you can say

> 電車がいる

On the other hand, when you are talking about an existence of an animate
thing, and that is an ordinary scene, you can use it with `ある`

> 昔、おじいさんとおばあさんがあった  
>  昔、おじいさんとおばあさんがいた

When you are talking about possession by nature, then you can use an animate
thing with `ある`.

> 彼には隠し子がある  
>  彼には隠し子がいる
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-07-27T00:44:36.583
2230
2011-07-27T13:32:55.643
2011-07-27T13:32:55.643
2228
answer