Spanish language Q&A Forum

what is the difference between como estas? and que estas?

Hola!

is it true that "vago" or "perezoso" can be used with both "ser" and "estar", depending on whether it's a permanent personality trait or just a current mood? 

Gracias!

HI

Can you send me advance lesson on all tocar uses

Thanks

We are taught that El Pretérito Imperfecto is used for past actions that were ongoing with no clear end that describes what was happening or what things were like. Also El Pretérito Imperfecto is used for past habitual action, repeated / regularly occuring past actions, and actions that used to happen in the past. 

We are also taught El Pretérito Indefinido is used to describe past actions in a way that conveys the sense that were completed / finished, this can be one off actions / events, series of actions, actions that happened a specific number of times, actions that happened at a specific point in time, and actions that interrupt an ongoing past action.

However most of the time these two past tenses translate to the same in English which can cause us problems with which one to use.

So after studying these two tenses a lot, I think that I have a trick that helps me most of the time choose the right tense. (although with some verbs, I need to study the nuances just a little more)

So if I want to describe a past action, as in setting a scene or convey the action was ongoing without showing an ending etc. Then I use El Pretérito Imperfecto, Había, comía, hablaba, pensaba.

Now with El Pretérito Indefinido hubo, comió, habló, pensó, I have started to think of it as a fact (100%) to help me know that the action has happened and finished / completed. (or didn't happen if we use NO infront of the verb)

When it comes to había and hubo (from the verb Haber to exist in this use) they translate the same in English as '’there was'’ and our English thinking part of the brain doesn't know what to do with the word hubo.

Therefore to help with this, I asked myself '’is this a descriptive '’there was'’ (había) or is this a '’there was'’(hubo) that is stating a fact (100%)'’.

Había mucha comida en la fiesta. (descriptive)

Hubo mucha comida en la fiesta. (fact)

There was a lot of food at the party.

Había una reunión importante el sábado.  (descriptive)

Hubo una reunión importante el sábado.  (fact)

There was an important meeting on Saturday.

I hope I am on the right path of choosing the right tense when talking about the past, I think it's all down to what you want to convey to the listener, description or fact.

I know that this construction (using cómo si + indicative to express indifference) is common in colloquial speech.  My question:  Is this a currently officially excepted grammatical construction by the RAE?  I found one source that says that the RAE says that this construction is common but must be considered incorrect.  But I am not sure if I’m looking at the most appropriate or most updated source.

What would be the best way to clarify between, for example: 

"We will send the exam results out within the next two weeks." [at some point during that time frame]

and 

"We will send the exam results out in two weeks." [after two weeks have passed]

Hi do use the same as month for year? ¿En qué año estamos? Estamos en 1988.

And weekends and seasons? Estamos a fin de semana. or Estamos al fin de semana.

Thank you

Is there a general rule about when the definite article must be used? Eg, in this exercise why does ‘fortuna’ not have one while abundancia, prosperidad and economía do?