52092
I found these example sentences plus their translations from [WaniKani by
Tofugu](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/japanese-learning-stack-
koichi/#wanikani-for-kanji-and-vocabulary), but I got confused by the
differences between 有る【ある】 and ある.

> マヨネーズなら、まだ少し有ります。 We still have a little mayonnaise.
>
> 彼には金も有るが、屋根の上に銀もある。 He has gold as well as a silver on his roof.

Why in the second sentence, they use both 有る and ある？

To me it seems that they both mean "to have", so why the change in
kanji/hiragana?

Are they interchangeable?

Also, how often and when do people use 有る?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-07T20:58:38.290
52089
2017-08-08T06:27:04.793
2017-08-08T00:49:15.570
16159
16159
question
kanji spelling
What is the difference between 有る【ある】 and ある？
I believe here we have to think of the fact that ある is not necessarily 有る in
kanji, but could be 在る and 或る as well (we can forget about the last one here).
More on the differences [here](http://chigai-
allguide.com/%E6%9C%89%E3%82%8B%E3%81%A8%E5%9C%A8%E3%82%8B%E3%81%A8%E6%88%96%E3%82%8B/).

The first one is used to indicate possession, ownership of something
(「財産が有る」「貫禄が有る」「有りがち」etc.). On the other hand, 在る indicates existence, "being
somewhere" (「東京に在る」,「要職に在る」 etc). I'm sure you know this already.

This being said, I think in your sentence the actual meaning is intended as
follows:

>   1. If (you need) mayonnaise, I still **have** some. (Rather than **there
> is** some).
>
>   2. He **has** gold but **there is** even silver on his roof.
>
>

I think the difference here is that the second ある in sentence number 2 is
probably supposed to be 在る here. This is the only difference I can think of
and at least what it seems it can be inferred from the structure of the
sentence and the use of kanji and kana. If the writer used 在る this would be
extra clear but I believe this is seldom written in kanji anyway. This is
probably true for 有る as well but maybe here it has been used just to make
clearer the difference between the first and second.

What actually confuses me is the translation you provide. Is that yours or it
was given on the website? If it's coming from an official Japanese language
site, the translation is probably better than mine and in that case I would
not understand well the difference you are asking for as with that translation
both should be 在る in that case (there are both silver and gold on the roof,
which means of course that "he has" those). However, no matter how I try to
parse the sentence, I feel my translation is OK. Maybe someone can comment on
this.

* * *

To expand on this subject, there is actually a document compiled on October
1st of the year Showa 56 (1981) that establishes a set of rules for the use of
kanji and kana in official documents to which everyone who belongs to an
official institution (and writes official documents) should adhere.

Regarding ある, it precisely states the following:

> **ある** （その点に問題がある。）

Where the sentence in brackets is meant to give an example of the situations
in which ある should be written in kana. You can find the full thing
[here](http://www5d.biglobe.ne.jp/Jusl/Bunsyo/BunKanji.html).
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-08T00:15:11.620
52092
2017-08-08T00:15:11.620
14205
52089
answer
ある and 有る are almost completely the same to native Japanese speakers. Of
course, 或る (a certain, some) is completely different, though. It's an
adjective, not even a verb.

About thirty years ago, when there were no word processors, Japanese people
almost always hand-wrote letters. At that time, more than 95% people chose ある,
just because it was easy to hand-write. Very educated writers, however, tended
to use 有る. I think they just wanted to show their education level.

Today, in the word processor era, it's very easy to type kanji, no matter how
difficult a kanji would be. Therefore, many people would choose 有る.

In many cases, writers even don't choose which. The word-processor decides
which, and **they just follow the automated conversion by the machine.**

In case of the second sentence, you may wonder why ある and 有る are used.
Probably there is no intention for the writer who was a human. The writer just
followed the machine. lol

In my opinion, using too much kanji is too heavy, bossy, too-elegant. So I
personally like ある.

For example, はしを持つ is confusing. It can be 端を持つ or 箸を持つ, although 橋を持つ is less
likely. In this case, kanji is preferred in order to make the meaning clearer.

For example, せんせいにおうえんをたのんだがたぼうだからというりゆうできょひされた。 is difficult to read, while
先生に応援を頼んだが多忙だからという理由で拒否された。is much easier to read.

However, in case of 有る/ある, there is no difference. Both are two letters.
Therefore, I don't think the two have any difference.

Do you understand what I'm getting at?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-08T06:21:21.277
52100
2017-08-08T06:27:04.793
2017-08-08T06:27:04.793
52089
answer