Spanish language Q&A Forum

The title of my question is only an example of several variations I've found on the same theme: when to use reflexive and when to use estar+participle? 

Me sorprendí cuando me propuso matrimonio

Estaba sorprendida cuando me propuso matrimonio

It seems to me that the reflexive above suggests more of an action (it surprised me...), while estar+participle suggests a state (being in a state of surprise).  

Could you explain and demonstrate by example how one might be chosen over the other?  

Also, the reflexive seems to be prompting me to add que+subjunctive (Me sorprendí que me propusiera matrimonio), but the participle version does not.

As you see, I'm a little confused and I wonder if my confusion comes from learning Latin American Spanish? The participle seems to occur more often when I read that variant. 

Saludos a todos

This was the question in the test that led me to this lesson,  but the lesson doesn't address the issue of choosing the correct past tense.

Ustedes ________ separados el año pasado.You were separated last year.
The hint tells you to use the tense for estaban, but I don't understand why since this seems to be talking about a definitive time that something happened.  Either the action of separating happened last year or the circumstance of being separated happened last year. Can someone explain why we should choose estaban over estuvieron (ustedes) besides the fact that the "hint" tells us to?
Thanks in advance for  any help!

How to decide to use por (for because) versus porque (as in the example above):

Would it be correct to use porque in these examples?  How would one know which to use (por vs porque)?

Ha salido en la televisión por tener quince minutos de fama.
He's been on TV because he was famous for fifteen minutes.

Va a estudiar medicina por seguir la tradición familiar.
She is studying medicine because it's family tradition.

I understand the notion of using estar rather than ser when the job is temporary, but there is absolutely nothing in the question to indicate that the job is a temporary or permanent position in most of the examples    If a job is to be permanent would you use ser rather than estar when referring to an appointment that someone is going to take up?  In the test questions and examples, it would seem not but the lesson notes don't explakin why.

Select the option with the verb in the correct form of the imperfect tense.

I always equate 'impersonal' with 'passive', as they seem to express the same thing. And, I've always used 'se' to express passive. So using third person is new to me, and I'm confused by this lesson and a question Kwiziq asked me to translate: 

'They took ages to build the hospital'

 among the choices were:

Han tardado mucho en construir el hospital (correct)

Se han tardado mucho en construir el hospital (incorrect)

Can someone explain why the second one is wrong.

Here are two other similar examples I found on Kwiziq that relate to this:

Tardaron mucho en construír los apartamentos = It took a long time to build the apartments.

Se tardó mucho en construir este hospital = It took (them, whoever built it) a long time to build this hospital.

I put '¡no seas tonto!' Is that correct too if the person is male?

Can we use parar synonymously as dejar or are these terms used in different contexts?

What is the rule regarding seasons of the year. When do we use the definite article el and when not. En el invierno/en invierno.

Thank you