Spanish language Q&A Forum

In the question

¡________ basura hay en esta casa!
Que mucha was an option offered that I chose and was marked wrong in favour of another option  cuánta.
Que mucha ...   translated in online dictionaries just fine.
Is there a difference ?

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.

Pensé que "encontrarse con" significaba un encuentro planeado mientras que "encontrarse a" significaba un encuentro casual. ¿Estoy equivocado?

Can you use estar para + noun? e.g. Miguel no está para bromas

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, in English, "Pon la mesa." would be translated as "Set the table," not "Lay the table."

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?

First off, a minor suggestion wrt this lesson to break the ice: ;)

When you are talking about the position of 'se', you are in fact referring to the position of BOTH 'se' and a corresponding direct object pronoun. You might want to note this in the explanations somewhere.

Now, my real question:

With a participle, does the combo of se & direct object pronoun HAVE to be attached at the end, or this is just an option? "Se la estamos decorando" and "Estamos decorandosela" are both grammatically correct and semantically equivalent, right? Or are we allowed to say "Se la estamos decorando" only because we have two verbs next to each other?

PS

I agree with the other poster who pointed out that these agglutination rules totally warrant a separate lesson.

¿Se quita la s del imperativo de nosotros cuando "selo" lo sigue?  Por ejemplo: mostremosselo o mostremoselo