で and counters in NHK article


I have two questions concerning the first clause in the following sentence:

> ＮＨＫが熊本市などにある７３の避難所で聞くと、多くの避難所で食べ物が足りないと言っていました。
>
> When the NHK asked at 73 of the shelters in Kumamoto-shi, they (the
> sheltered people) said that there isn't enough food or water at many
> shelters.

The first question is regarding で. In this case, で indicates where the action
occurred, right? That is, as opposed to "whom/what was asked" or "about what
was asked". If so, how could the clause be changed to indicate the NHK
specifically asked people in the shelter (避難に perhaps) or about people in the
shelter (避難のことを maybe)?

Second, why does ７３の避難所 not require a counter?

The full context and link to the article is below.

>
> 熊本県では大きな地震が続いていて、１８日の午後１時半には約９万４０００人が６３２の避難所（＝逃げてきた人が集まる場所）に避難していました。ＮＨＫが熊本市などにある７３の避難所で聞くと、多くの避難所で食べ物が足りないと言っていました。みんなに食べ物を渡すため、食事を１日に２回だけにしている所もあります。

<http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10010487241000/k10010487241000.html>




  1. You filled in "they" in the latter part of the sentence even there is no such word in the original, right? Then naturally you can add an implicit object in the first part, too.

> When NHK asked **them** at 73 shelters that are mainly located in Kumamoto,
> they said...

Or if you're uncomfortable with the translation, you can reword it as:

> As NHK had interviews at 73 shelters that are mainly located in Kumamoto, we
> were told at many shelters that they are short of food.

That's how it goes when the Japanese language omits pronouns.

  2. Good point. We have some situations that don't need counters:

    * buildings, facilities or geographic locations don't need them
    * abstract units don't need them, in many cases they are counters by themselves  
cf.

> 30頭の動物 _30 (heads of) animals_  
>  30の動物 _30 animal species_

    * counting numerical items rather than real objects doesn't need them (not applied to animate things)
    * using ratio, percentage etc. rather than numbers never has them

In this case, you can use a counter as well. 箇所（ヶ所・カ所） would be suitable.

> ＮＨＫが熊本市などにある７３ **箇所** の避難所で聞くと、…

**PS** There's a famous novel titled
『[二十四の瞳](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8C%E5%8D%81%E5%9B%9B%E3%81%AE%E7%9E%B3)』,
lacking any counter, makes it terse and poetic.




  1. You filled in "they" in the latter part of the sentence even there is no such word in the original, right? Then naturally you can add an implicit object in the first part, too.

> When NHK asked **them** at 73 shelters that are mainly located in Kumamoto,
> they said...

Or if you're uncomfortable with the translation, you can reword it as:

> As NHK had interviews at 73 shelters that are mainly located in Kumamoto, we
> were told at many shelters that they are short of food.

That's how it goes when the Japanese language omits pronouns.

  2. Good point. We have some situations that don't need counters:

    * buildings, facilities or geographic locations don't need them
    * abstract units don't need them, in many cases they are counters by themselves  
cf.

> 30頭の動物 _30 (heads of) animals_  
>  30の動物 _30 animal species_

    * counting numerical items rather than real objects doesn't need them (not applied to animate things)
    * using ratio, percentage etc. rather than numbers never has them

In this case, you can use a counter as well. 箇所（ヶ所・カ所） would be suitable.

> ＮＨＫが熊本市などにある７３ **箇所** の避難所で聞くと、…

**PS** There's a famous novel titled
『[二十四の瞳](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8C%E5%8D%81%E5%9B%9B%E3%81%AE%E7%9E%B3)』,
lacking any counter, makes it terse and poetic.

