Stuck with particle で and に

[Akhademik]

I've been learning Japanese for about 2 months now. No matter how hard i tried, i still get stuck with these particles. Been searching around the Net to find a way out but ... no hope.

EX: Please take a look at these

1. びじゅっかん (で/に) 彼にあいました。
With this one i pick the particle に cause i understand i have to go to the "びじゅっかん" (showing the direction of the verb) so that i can meet my friend.
*My teacher correct this one with で

2.デパート (へ/に)　プレゼントをかいにいきますた。
With this one i pick the particle に cause i know that you have to go to the shop to buy the present right? So this one is also showing the direction of the verb?
*My teacher correct this one with へ

So could you pple show me how can i clearly distinguish all of these particles? And if you can please provide me with some examples so i can chose the particle myself then you will know that i'm get over is. Thank you so guys so so much

[Akhademik]

Here are some more:

*Aさんは日本 (に) びじゅっのべんきょうにきました
With this one, my teacher correct me with に although i pick up the へ

*ごはんをたべます。はし「を」つかいます
And this one, i though that when we mentioned the mean that we used then で must be used. But why this one is turned out to be を ? So Japanese particles go along with the verbs or not? I'm so confused!!

Please, please help me out.

[NileCat]

It’s difficult for me to explain the general rules because I’m native. I suppose someone could give you a good resource explaining the differences.
Here are a couple of things I thought about your examples.

1.　に doesn’t work here. It has to be で.
(There is a typo in the sentence. びじゅつかん)
2.　へ is a proper usage. However, に works as well. It would sound causal, though.
(a typo - かいにいきました)
3.　Same as 2. へ is fine. But に is not incorrect.
(a type - びじゅつ)
4.　It has to be を.

[Akhademik]

Thank you for your quickly reply.
I know it's very hard for you to explain all this cause with you that's the way it should be; it comes to you naturally but with others ... not that quite easy. I have to mention that my teacher is also a native Japanese but with some answers that you told me both are correct, my teacher didn't agree with my solution !! As far as i understand your answer is that the specific particle is always go along with the specific verb so it's better to learn by heart the verb and then the particle comes with its, right? Cause when i know a definition for a particle there always some exception for that particle. Oh my god, this one is killing me

[takiras]

In Japanese, when showing location, you have to choose between に and で. The main difference (as far as I know), is that you use に when referring to a non-action, and で when referring to an action.

e.g.
I'm in the kitchen (non-action)
台所にいます。
I'm studying at school
学校で勉強しています。

*ごはんをたべます。はし「を」つかいます
And this one, i though that when we mentioned the mean that we used then で must be used. But why this one is turned out to be を ? So Japanese particles go along with the verbs or not? I'm so confused!!

You do indeed use で for the means that you used, however, in this sentence you used 使う (to use)

Consider these sentences:
I eat rice with chopsticks.
おはしでご飯を食べます。
I use chopsticks. note: there is no 'by/with' to indicate means here!
おはしを使います。

What your sentence　「ごはんをたべます。はしでつかいます。」 would mean is 'I eat rice. I use by/with chopsticks', which doesn't make sense in English either!

Hope this helps.

[micahcowan]

1. に with places is used when something resides/is located somewhere, or as a destination (where it is often equivalent to へ). When you're referring to a place where X happened, you use で.

びじゅつかんで彼にあいました。
but: びじゅつかん(に or へ)彼にあいにいきました。 (Because here it's a destination) "I went to the art gallery to meet him."

With 2 and 3, as Nilecat points out, either へ or に is fine; I'm kind of mystified as to why one would definitely pick one for one and the other for the other, as opposed to just being consistent.

4. Yes, you're right, で is used in general when you're describing the means. For instance,

はしでごはんをたべました。-> I ate the meal [using/with] chopsticks.

Note that here the main thrust of the sentence is that you ate the meal. Here, で indicates a "with" sort of concept. However, with:

ごはんをたべます。はしをつかいます。

We're expressing two separate (if closely connected) ideas. "I'll eat a meal", and "I'll use chopsticks." In the second sentence, chopsticks is clearly the direct object in the sentence, and not some incidental thing. We didn't utilize something else as "the means" to using the chopsticks... we just used 'em. Perhaps one could (if one really stretched) imagine a situation where you could say ゆびではしをつかいます to mean "I used chopsticks, by means of my fingers" (perhaps if we completely forgot how to say the somewhat more natural "ゆびではしをもちます”). It's obviously completely contrived, but perhaps it can help illustrate why it's を there instead of で?

[furrykef]

で is also used to describe where events occur.

京都にお寺がある。 = There are temples in Kyōto. [not an event]
京都でお祭りがある。 = There is a festival in Kyōto. [event]

This may help you understand why you use で with 会う, since meeting somebody is an event.

[Akhademik]

Thank you for all of your posts. Very helpful to me. Sorry for late reply cause i got an exam.

During the exam i still made mistake with these particles. I'm gonna post it here for you guys. Pls take a look

A. ＊学校のちかくのちゅう車場（で）車を止めます
＊This one turn out to be に

B. ＊この道（へ）まっすぐ行って、はしを渡ります
＊This one turn out to be を

According to the post of takiras　に　should be used when the verb is a non-action verb, but i things the example A the verb is an action verb right?　And about example B i don't know why can't we use　へ?　

Thank you for your help once again!

[NileCat]

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Japanese/G ... _Particles

On A, で is also possible.
On B, the road is not your destination. You are not to go TO the road. You go ALONG the road. That’s why. See the difference from 学校へ行く?

[Akhademik]

Thanks for your information. I think i should practice more until i get familiar with that. Not only me, but also all my classmate get confused with particles. I'm gonna share all these information with my friends.

[NileCat]

Akhademik, I know it is not very easy. Choosing the appropriate particle is tremendously tough for anyone.
Do you see my confusion about English prepositions?
Why my grandfather died OF cancer? Why it isn’t BY or FROM? Why do you buy a ticket to the movie? It should be a ticket FOR the movie, shouldn’t it?
Good luck with your Japanese study!

[chikara]

..... Do you see my confusion about English prepositions?
Why my grandfather died OF cancer? Why it isn’t BY or FROM? Why do you buy a ticket to the movie? It should be a ticket FOR the movie, shouldn’t it? .......

NileCat-san, all of the alternatives above are not wrong it is just that some are less wrong than others.

Personally I would say "died FROM cancer". The coroner often brings down a finding that a person "died FROM natural causes.

We have a saying in English, "he who lives by the sword dies BY the sword". When we had capital punishment in this country the sentence was "death BY hanging".

To me the difference in nuance between FROM and BY is that FROM indicates a cause while BY indicates a means. For example, "death BY hanging" results in "death FROM asphyxiation". While I wouldn't say "died OF cancer" the phrase "died OF a broken heart" is quite common.

Personally I buy tickets FOR a movie. For example just last night I said to the ticket seller "two adults FOR RED". FOR and To are interchangeable in that context.

[Akhademik]

Nilecat-san don't worry about that, maybe times gone by i'll be improved hehe And i'm looking forward to it. And moreover my English is not too good either, just about enough to communicate as well as asking questions which i believed my best ability Once again thank for all the information. Now from all among languages that i knew (which are French, English, Chinese) i can right now vote for Japanese as the most difficult languages ever But, i'm still enjoy studying it

[micahcowan]

Why my grandfather died OF cancer? Why it isn’t BY or FROM? Why do you buy a ticket to the movie? It should be a ticket FOR the movie, shouldn’t it?

This is why I think grammar rules are pretty much just approximations, and "rules of thumb", rather than representing actual knowledge of a language.

Unlike chikara, "ticket to the movie" definitely sounds better to me than "tickets for a movie", though the latter doesn't sound wrong. I would expect to hear "I've got tickets to the Yankees" much, much more frequently than "I've got tickets for the Yankees [game]". I think the difference might be that it could be a shorthand for "tickets to [see] the movie/game", or something, but honestly I don't know. Like pretty much everything in a native language, it's just pattern recognition, and some patterns end up being exceptions to the more general patterns.

As chikara said, all of OF BY and FROM are correct, but only one of them sounds natural to me; the others would sound to me like they give away the fact that they were spoken by a non-native speaker. No idea why, and all of them are correct grammatically. It's just a matter of what you hear by far the most often, and imitating it.

Strangely, some of the other prepositions would seem more appropriate in slightly different contexts. For instance, "Didn't your grandfather have cancer?" "Yes, he died from it" (though "of" would probably work here too). "The number of incidents of death by cancer..." (also could use from, but in this situation, not of... maybe because "death of cancer" would sound like "cancer" died).

[NileCat]

I do love this forum.