I have been in Singapore many times.

[sitifan]

1. I have been to Singapore many times.
2. I have been in Singapore many times.

Number 1 is correct. Is 2 also acceptable to native speakers of English?

 

[5jj]

It is possible in the right context.

 

[probus]

But the two expressions have slightly different meanings. What are you trying to get across?

 

[sitifan]

But the two expressions have slightly different meanings. What are you trying to get across?

I am an English teacher in Taiwan. From time to time, I will see such a test question as follows:
I have been ____ Singapore many times. (A) to (B) in
The answer to the above question is always "to." Since there is no context, I think "in" is also possible.
I know the difference in meaning between "been in" and "been to."
I have been in Singapore for many years. (correct)
*I have been to Singapore for many years. (incorrect)

 

[tedmc]

I think the difference is in the emphasis, though both amount to the same thing.
1 emphasises the number of trips one has made to the country.
2 emphasises the number of times of experience one has had in the country.

 

[probus]

Here is an example of the "right context" mentioned by 5jj:

I've been in Singapore many times although I find its equatorial climate oppressive.

 

[tedmc]

typo - oppressive
The context is about one's experience.

 

[sitifan]

Here is an example of the "right context" mentioned by 5jj:

I've been in Singapore many times although I find its equatorial climate oppressive.

Is the sentence below acceptable?
Although I find its equatorial climate oppressive, I've been in Singapore many times.

 

[GoesStation]

Is the sentence below acceptable?
Although I find its equatorial climate oppressive, I've been in Singapore many times.

Yes.

 

[tedmc]

I would replace "its" with "Singapore's" and "in Singapore" with "there".