Spanish language Q&A Forum

I'm afraid I have to join the others on this one. This is has got to be the hardest concept I have encountered so far. I'm glad that you mentioned that if you use "nunca" or "siempre" then the verb would be in the simple past. However, that is where my understanding stops. I tried thinking about whether one is recent past (perfecto) and one is more distant but still somewhat recent (indefinido), but that is confusing and probably not correct. Thank you also for stating that this is something that is different across all the different countries. I will just keep trying and hope that something sticks at some point.   

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.

You make this construction unnecessarily complicated. The conditional is used here simply because even the future event is stated conditionally: so-and-so “would” do such-and-such. It’s a perfect parallel to the English conditional.

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

Hello. Can someone provide insight please? It says you use Hay in front of a noun so why is it used to say something is foggy. I am sure that foggy is an adjective just like the word sunny so why is esta used to say something is sunny but you can’t use it to say it is foggy?

Hi, is there a subject change requiring the subjunctive if the subjects are I and we? Por ejemplo, I want to walk the dog after we eat. Coz technically the subjects are different but I’m still part of the group we. 

Which is the most used form: "Cómo te llamas?" or "Cual es tú nombre?" I didn't understand quite well when reading the text

(please ignore the lack of the interrogation point at the beginning of the questions, my keyboard doesn't have this "feature")