In English as well as in other Indo-European languages, one and the same verb is used for expressing either locational states of the type "I am at home" or classificatory meanings as in the sentence "Our teacher is a Ghanaian", as well as for the purpose of identification as in "John is the boss".

By contrast, in many (though not all) African languages, these different modes of 'being' are lexically differentiated.
Akan uses several different lexical forms to express the idea of "being" all of which will normally be translated by the English verb to be. Below, we will show how the Akan verbs wõà and yñà and the copula neá are used for expressing different types of relationships which are normally rendered in English by the verb to be.

In English, and also predominantly in other Indo-European languages, possession is predicated by a separate verb, distinct from the verb of being, e.g. English "to have". By contrast, in many African languages, the possessive relationship falls within the scope of meaning of one of the lexemes used for expressing the idea of being.
Akan uses the same lexeme wõà for both location and possession.
The predication of location, existence and possession
Example (1) illustrates the LOCATIONAL MEANING of the verb wõà:

(1)	ÏÀwõà	suàkuáuà-	mà.
	s/he-be	school-	in
	"S/he is in school"

Apart from this locational use, wõà also occurs in EXISTENTIAL expressions. 

(2)	Suàkuáuà	wõà	kuàroá-má.
	school	be	town-in
	"There is a school in town."

(3)	OÀnyaàmeá	wõà	hõá.
	God	be	there
	"God exists."

Between the concepts of location and existence, there is evidently a close connection (cf. Lyons1967) which explains the use of the verb wõà for both types of expression. 
Possession is also conceptually related to location (Lyons 1967). This conceptual similarity is reflected in the use of the basically locational verb wõà for expressing POSSESSION, as shown in examples (4) and (5): 

(4)	Wõà-	wõà	sìkaá	pìì.
	they	be(-with)	money	much
	"They are rich."

(5)	Meà-	wõà	fäeá	bä.
	I-	be(-with)	house	a
	"I have a house." (Redden/Owusu 1963: 29)

All the above sentences may be negated by replacing the positive locational verb wõà by its negative counterpart nànä "not-to-be(-somewhere)".

(6)	ÏÀnànä	suàkuáuà-	mà.
	s/he-not-be	school-	in
	"S/he is not in school."

(7)	Suàkuáuà	nànä	kuároá-	má.
	school	not-be	town-	in
	"There is no school in town."

(8)	OÀnyaànkoá!põán	bä	nànä	hõá.
	God	some	not-be	there
	"There is no God." (Psalm 14:2)

(9)	Wõà-	nànä	sìkaá	pìì.
	they-	not-be(-with)	money	much
	"They are not rich."

(10)	Meà-	nànä	fäeá	bä.
	I-	not-be(-with)	house	a
	"I do not have a house."

Table 1 sums up our findings so far from a comparative viewpoint: LOCATION may be taken to be the basic meaning of wõà (and its negative counterpart nànä). The range of application of this basic locational meaning extends over location, existence and possession. Compared to this, English possessive meaning is mainly expressed by the verb "to have":
 

The predication of class membership, description and identification

We might also have said that the sentence attributes to the owl the properties of a bird. 
In an analogous way, the verb yñà is used for the purpose of DESCRIBING A PROPERTY or an inherent QUALITY of a person or a thing:

(12)	AÀtaàaàdeáñá	foáfoárõá	noá	yñà	fñá.
	dress	new	the	be	beautiful
	"The new dress is beautiful."

-> Exercises

Akan is careful to distinguish classification and description on the one hand, and IDENTIFICATION on the other. For understanding the way in which identification is expressed in daily conversation, several cases must be kept apart:

1. Establishing a relationship of EXCLUSIVE IDENTITY between two terms. This is expressed through the copula neá:

(13)	Koàfä	neá	meá	nuàaá.
	Kofi	be	my	brother
	"Kofi is my brother." (Christaller, 1875: 110)

The point of interest here is the question as to who Kofi is, or, alternatively, who the speaker's brother is. The use of neá implies a symmetric relationship between the two terms connected by the copula. This means that if the terms are exchanged, the meaning of the sentence remains unchanged:

(14)	Meá	nuàaá	neáá	Koàfä.
	my	brother	is	brother
	"Kofi is my brother." (Christaller, 1875: 110)

2. Various means of expression may be used for identifying a person appearing on the scene, or a thing or a phenomenon becoming manifest in the situation of speech.

3. The final particle näeá may be used both for identification and for classification:

(15)

Koàfä näeá.

"It's Kofi."

(This expression will be used, for instance, as a comment referring to the noise of someone entering the house.)

(16)

AÀnoàmaáaá näeá.

"It is a bird."

(This could be said in a discussion about whether a certain thing is to be considered a plant or an animal.)

4. For identifying a newly arrived person, one uses the final particle a:

(17)	Hwaán aà?	(a) Meá aà.	(b) Koàfä aà.
	"Who is it?"	"It is me."	"It is Kofi."

Alternatively, it is also possible to use the verb yñà construed with an impersonal subject: 

(18)	(a) ÑÀ-yñà meá.	(b) ÑÀ-yñà meá Koàfä.	(c) ÑÀ-yñà Koàfä.
	"It is me."	"It is me, Kofi."	"It is Kofi."

The question has often been asked whether behind this puzzling diversity of expression in the domain of 'being' in African languages, there is a generic and unified concept of 'being'. Akan provides partial evidence that there is. All the various expressions of non-locational being are negated in the same way, namely by using the negative form of the verb yñà, i.e. nà-yñá "not to be". 

(19)	AÀtaàaàdeáñá	foáfoárõá	noááá	nà-yñá	fñá.
	dress	new	the	not-be	beautiful
	"The new dress is not beautiful."
	(Negates example 12)

(20)	Koàfä	nà-yñá	meá	nuàaá.
	Kofi	not-be	my	brother
	"Kofi is not my brother."
	(Negates example 13)

(21)	ÑÀ-nà-yñá	Koàfä.
	It-not-be	Kofi
	"It is not Kofi."
	(Negates example 15, 17b, 18c)