Spanish language Q&A Forum

I am currently taking lessons from a tutor from Latin American who told me that in describing past experiences you would specifically use the past perfecto-He viajado en Mexica instead of the preterito. You contradict this. I wonder if this means you can actually use either and it's just a preference.

Would a correct answer to this also be ¿Se deben estudiar más?

For the last sentence, can't we use 'llevar' to talk about time spent doing something? 

Note that in El Futuro Simple, only the 3rd person form habrá is ever used on its own and it means there will be.

I don't understand the meaning of this statement. Can you explain and/or give an example?

"Le hemos explicado a ella el problema." Seems redundant. Is it a special case, or a constant rule?

What, if any, are the circumstances in which "si" introduces a clause that is followed by the indicative mode of a verb, rather than the subjunctive mode?

It seems to me it is not always the case that se comes from a pronominal verb.

I think not when the situtation is accidental or emotional, right? So a non pronominal verb can accompany se while it is being activated buy these 2 states. In other words in, 

Los niños se nos están haciendo mayores sin darnos cuenta.Our children are growing without us realising.
 hacerse not here,  se only comes from emotional involvement. Or is it always the case? I can see where hacerse means becoming.

In the phrase, ". . . y lo peor fue el viento, ya que tenía miedo . . . ," why does it use preterite (fue) and then imperfect (tenía)? Aren't they both describing the same time frame? 

Hola hola!

I have been reading the message board and found a lot of opinions around this sentence

She has made many sacrifices for her children.

Ha hecho muchos sacrificios por sus hijos.

There seemed different explanations for the reason why "por" was selected, one of which being an "intimate recipient". I initially liked this explanation and found it plausible. 

However, I continued reading and found the mention of "for the sake of".

She has made many sacrifices for (the sake of) her children.

Ha hecho muchos sacrificios por (el bien de) sus hijos 

Three questions:

1) Can you say "por el bien de" meaning "for the sake of"?

2) Can "por el bien de" be used in the above example?

3) Is it possible that in English "for the sake of" the (the sake of) can be omitted and likewise in the Spanish "por el bien de" the (el bien de) can be omitted?

If the answer to question 3) is yes. Perhaps, this explains and clarifies the use of "por" in the sentence.

Ha hecho muchos sacrificios por sus hijos.

Your thoughts would be much appreciated.

I feel trying to explain the por and para  debate is a difficult task and your help is genuinely appreciated   :) 

I have more questions though  ;)

This got me thinking about the  "for the benefit of":

He did it for the benefit of the company.

Lo hizo en beneficio de la empresa.

This could also be written in English as:

He did it for the company.

Lo hizo por la empresa.

I have two more question:

4) Are the following two sentences correct?

i) Lo hizo en beneficio de la empresa.

ii) Lo hizo por la empresa.

And, finally...

5) Do they have the same meaning?

I would be grateful if you answer the questions above and see if I have understood this use of por.

Many thanks,

Ryan

Hi, I'm really struggling with this one, and there are only two possibilities!  It's "Aquí tienes 20 euro por si……. dinero para un taxi.", with the options of necesitas and necesitaras. The questions says that the speaker thinks there's a low probability of the money being needed.  The correct answer is the imperfect subjunctive, necesitaras.  I suppose that it has to be that because the present indicative is not permissible in this structure, but I don’t know why.

Thanks in advance,

Dave