"There is only one table in the restaurant that I would like to go to."
Translation:Ravintolassa, jossa minä haluaisin käydä, on vain yksi pöytä.
The English sentence is ambiguous. I read the meaning of the English sentence the other way around: I understood "that" = "table", not = "restaurant", so in other words, there is only that one table that the speaker wants to go to. So I put as a translation into Finnish: "Ravintolassa on vain yksi pöytä, jossä minä haluaisin käydä" Is that a correct sentence for to represent this second meaning?
I understand what you mean with the English one, I can also understand that one both ways. However, in Finnish the other meaning is formed a bit differently, yours was not fully wrong but there's a couple of things to fix:
- Ravintolassa on vain yksi pöytä, jossa/jonka ääressä haluaisin istua. OR
- Ravintolassa on vain yksi pöytä, johon haluaisin mennä/istuutua.
You can't use "käydä" about a table unless you mean walking next to a table that you would return almost immediately, "Käyn heidän pöydässään." = "I visit their table." So you can "käydä ravintolassa" but then you have to use other verbs about the table. Those sentences mean in English:
- In the restaurant, there's only one table that I would like to sit at.
- In the restaurant, there's only one table that I would like to go to(/and sit at).
So, "to sit at a table" is "istua pöydän ääressä" or "istua pöydässä". And the second one sounds bit weird in English for me, but "mennä pöytään" roughly means "to go and sit at a table". "Istuutua" also sound very formal for me and I wouldn't use that in everyday speech really. Also, the word order of both sentences in English sound a bit clumsy for me and I'm not even 100% sure about their correctness but I tried to form them word to word so it maybe helps figuring out the sentences better.