Spanish language Q&A Forum

Por que "la montaña"' en ingles "the mountains" Should be las montañas?

…but I’ve just realised why I get confused about when to use the subjunctive after ‘no sé que…’ (‘I don’t know that…’) or ‘no sé qué…’ (‘I don’t know which/what…’), now I realise that I should use the subjunctive in the first case and not in the second. Thank you! 

Hi Inma,

The last sentence should be linked to Using llevar + present participle I believe, but it has been wrongly linked to Using llevar + past participle

Saludos,

Wenli

I know ser means ‘to be’ in terms of characteristics and estar means ‘to be’ in temporary sense or in terms of location but why does this exercise use estar for ‘to be clear’ and ‘is cloudy’ but ser for ‘can be unstable’?

This grading of this question appears to be an error on the part of Progress. Conditional Perfect is the answer specified, which is "no habríamos muerto" and is the answer that I provided  The answer from Progress is given as "no hubiéramos muerto" and is Preterito Plumamperfecto Subjuntivo, not Condicional Perfecto. 

It's not quite true that English has only two demonstratives - there's an older word still in common use at least in the North of England, usefully equivalent to 'aquel':

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/yonder

It's in wider use in the phrase 'wild blue yonder'