I though the use of the particle ni was only for object, location, direction, specific time but I think it's also for possession.there is an anime called Oretachi ni Tsubasa wa Nai (we don't have wings) and ni here is used as possession particle so why we can't use no.

I don't really know Japanese grammar well enough to point anything out as fact, but it's an anime, so I'm thinking as a possibility that the particle "ni" is being used in a casual, anime-specific context. I could be wrong, however.

But maybe in that same sphere the particle "ni" can be used in a casual context in regards to possession.

hackerwz Wrote:I though the use of the particle ni was only for object, location, direction, specific time but I think it's also for possession.there is an anime called Oretachi ni Tsubasa wa Nai (we don't have wings) and ni here is used as possession particle so why we can't use no.

You can think of it as "For us, there are no wings" which has basically the same meaning -- "ni" can sometimes express a subject in this kind of phrase. It's not possession; you see other examples of it as well. The Koujien and Meikyo both claim it is honorific but I'm not sure it's that specific. I'm having a hard time finding concrete examples because there's too much interference from other に phrases; maybe someone else can pitch in.

(It's neither casual nor anime specific.)

EDIT: This is pretty elusive; I don't see it in the DBJ or DIJ. I know it's in JSL but I can't find the entry.

Like Yudantaiteki said, it's not possession; I feel like it just indicates a kind of "For me" or "For us" kind of meaning.

For example you will hear/see things like 僕には子供がいない to mean "I don't have any kids" or 僕には彼女がいる to mean "I have a girlfriend".

It's not a very good explanation, but part of the problem is that you are assuming it means possession based on the translation, not the Japanese itself.

yudantaiteki Wrote:I'm having a hard time finding concrete examples because there's too much interference from other に phrases; maybe someone else can pitch in.

には.+がある on the Green Goddess:

彼には一生遊んで暮らせるだけの財産がある. He has enough of a fortune to spend the rest of his life without working.
この町には立派な美術館がある. The town ¬boasts [has] a fine museum.

I'd characterize most of the examples I looked through as "~ has a <property>":

方言には標準語にない温かさがある. Dialects have a warmth (about them) that is missing in the standard language.
京都には東京などは足もとにも寄せつけない歴史と伝統がある. Cities like Tokyo ¬cannot compare with [are nowhere near] Kyoto when it comes to history and tradition.

Examples without には/にも were much rarer, but here's a couple:

知っていてやったとすれば, 彼に弁解の余地はない.　If he did it knowingly, he ¬has no excuse [doesn't have a leg to stand on].
あのときの気持ちに変わりはない.　I feel just the same as I did then.

When I come across it, it makes sense for me to think of it as に (to denote the existence of something) + は (to indicate contrast, or maybe topic)

OK, thanks -- I believe you can use it with "qualities" like 上手 or できる also, i.e. 私には英語はできない。

hackerwz Wrote:I though the use of the particle ni was only for object, location, direction, specific time but I think it's also for possession.there is an anime called Oretachi ni Tsubasa wa Nai (we don't have wings) and ni here is used as possession particle so why we can't use no.

You should buy "All About Particles" by Naoko Chino.
For each particle, it has example sentences for each specific use.

The "ni" particle has about 20 different usages listed in the book.

@OP and yudantaiteki
This is in the DoBJ, under "aru (1)", note (4):

A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar Wrote:4. A thing (whether animate or inanimate) can also occur in the location position of KS (A). In this case, the sentence expresses possession rather than existence. Examples:

(3) a. この車（に）はカー・ステレオがある。
(Lit. There is a car stereo in this car. (=This car has a car stereo.))

b. 私（に）は車がある。
(Lit. There is a car with me. (=I have a car.))

Note that even if aru expresses the idea of possession, possessed things are marked not by o but by ga. This is because aru essentially indicates existence.

So に is strictly speaking marking a location (which will correspond to the subject when translated into natural English) and ある is being used possessively; に itself is not indicating possession (and it's also not "for").

[Note (5) also expands on this to explain restrictions on the objects in such sentences when the objects are animate.]

It's more flexible than just ある, though. I don't know all the contexts it can be used in, but it's definitely possible with できる and 分かる.

Yeah. My interpretation might be wrong, and using は after に in these kinds of sentences where ある indicates possession seems a lot more common than using に by itself (like in 「俺たちに翼はない」), but I still lean towards seeing に here as technically marking a location (which is actually the 'possessor'). This is also definitely the case with sentences like 「僕には子供がいない」 and 「この町には立派な美術館がある」, so に here definitely shouldn't be thought of as "for."

I think of the に in a sentence like 「私には英語はできない」 as being a different usage of に altogether from the に in 「私には車がある」. This is also supported by the 日本語教師と学習者のための文型辞典, which lists the latter as "a には" and the former as "b には". Here's what it has to say on "Ｎには + 分かる" (etc.):

【には】
助詞の「に」がついた名詞を取り立てるために「は」がつけ加えられたもの。

b Ｎには ＜評価の基準＞
（１）このセーターは私には大きすぎる。
（２）この問題はむずかしすぎて私には分かりません。
（３）この仕事は経験のない人には無理でしょう。

人を表す名詞を受けて「その人にとっては」という意を表す。「大きい」「むずかしい」「できる」「できない」などの評価が何に対して下されるのかを示す。「他のものはともかくとして」という対比的な含みが生じる。「に」だけで用いられることは少なく、「…には」の形となるのが普通。

(日本語教師と学習者のための文型辞典, p. 449)