Spanish language Q&A Forum

Thank you Silvia,

In "La vida de Eva (B1)" gapfill test we have:

"Eva siempre ha sido una persona que nunca toma decisiones por dinero o por conveniencia. Su familia la quiere mucho y, para ser sinceros, ha hecho muchos sacrificios ______ sus hijos."

The hint for the gap is:

"she has made many sacrifices for her children."

the accepted answer is "por"; "para" is marked wrong.

The explanation given for this is:

"Lesson: Using por (not para) to express the originating cause or reason"

Could you please help me to see

why "for" is interpreted here as indicating the "cause" and not the "recipient"?

"Acordaos que estamos fríendo esta tortilla a fuego lento."

Shouldn't it be "de que"?

Yo te habría aceptado de nuevo en casa mientras me hubieras contado la verdad.
I would have accepted your return home provided you had told me the truth.

this sentence is talking about future events from the point of view of a past. it is not really talking about future event from current point of view. is that right?

i find this structure similar to si conditional statement of expressing what something could had happened in the past, if another past condition is satisfied. 

may I ask if they are the same?

Yo te habría aceptado de nuevo en casa si me hubieras contado la verdad.