Existence and possession

[chard]

In Japanese, the verb "ある" is used for both existence and possession. But perhaps it used to be two separate verbs.

Comments

[keirf]

Finnish uses the same verb for possession and existance - olla. You alter the subject to indicate possesion.

Hän on - He is
Hänullä on - he has

It's made a bit clearer by the fact that the subject is usual dropped for "to be". So, for example, you tend to say olen, rather than minä olen for "I am", unless you are emphasising it.

[bookly]

I think "mii" in Thai means both.

"mii rot" - there is a car
"chan mii rot" - I have a car

aru

[anonymous]

Yes, I'm pretty sure that they used to be /still can be written with different kanji, but people just generally don't bother. The same applies to iru I think; the kanji for the 'to be' sense is the same as that used for 'oru' (keigo equivalent of iru)* and although I've never seen a kanji for the 'have' sense I have had my work corrected when I used the aforementioned kanaji in the wrong sense

[chard]

By the way, the antonym of ある, ない, can be written with a kanji to: 無い. This is the kanji for "nothingness" which is the answer to that famous koan.