27439
In Japanese, when describing the location of something you can say either
`arimasu` and `desu`. E.g.

> a) Resutoran-wa ik-kai-ni arimasu

or

> b) Resutoran-wa ik-kai desu

What's the difference between a & b?

(a) uses `ni`, so that stresses the location. (b) uses `desu` so it sounds
more polite. Is this correct?

Please note, this is a question about location. It is not a question about the
difference between `arimasu` (exists/to be: non animate) and `imasu`
(exists/to be: animate).
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-16T12:01:24.813
27422
2015-08-17T04:48:41.237
9537
question
grammar
What's the difference between arimasu and desu (when referring to location)?
I don't think there is any difference, other than that (b) is shorter and more
common (both are very common). No difference in politeness because both use
丁寧語.

Source: Japanese native
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-16T14:00:17.100
27426
2015-08-16T14:08:51.753
2015-08-16T14:08:51.753
499
499
27422
answer
They're both pretty polite, but I think you could say that there's an implied
quantitative difference.

For example, when you say b 'restoran wa ikkai desu' to me, that sounds like
the person is implying that there is only **one** restaurant, and it's on the
first floor. Like 'As for the restaurant, it's on the first floor'.

But when you say a 'restoran wa ikkai ni arimasu' then that sound like it
implies that there are _one or more_ restaurants on the first floor. 'There
is/are (a) restaurant/s on the first floor'.

Of course, Japanese is very vague so there's no singular/plural tell about the
restaurants, and there's no definitive law about this -restoran wa ikkai desu
could very well mean multiple restaurants are on the first floor too, there's
nothing wrong with it grammatically- but that's what the implication sounds
like to me.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-17T04:48:41.237
27439
2015-08-17T04:48:41.237
27422
answer