Spanish language Q&A Forum

¿Tienen el mismo significado "está por llover" y "está para llover"? ¿Hay algún matiz?

The confusing part is not se vs le for me but "to" vs "for." Your explanation was that an indirect object means to him/it, etc., but the example is "for him", which is very different in English. I think this needs to be explained. When I speak I usually try to clarify with "para mi" for "for me", but it may not be right.

Tom

Hola soporte,

I'm struggling a little bit to get my head around the bold section: He estado de viaje y me ha encantado todo

I guess it means 'to myself, it has enchanted me all (I have loved it all)'?

But because in my English head I think it looks strange (lo/le he encantado todo seems more natural), do you have any other lessons on expressing maybe the love, like stuff with the pronoun, so that I can get my head round it.

Muchas gracias,

Only the first word is being spoken in this example.

Hola a todos,

No hay muchas carreteras ________ conducir despacio. There are not many roads where one can drive slowly.HINT: ¿Dónde or donde?
Although the required answer here is ‘donde’, I instinctively want to write ‘donde se puede’.  So it’s ok to leave out the ‘se puede’= ‘one can’ and just use the infinitive, in this instance ‘conducir’?  I appreciate that this quiz is only to determine whether to use ‘donde’ or ‘dónde’ but it just read oddly to me. 
Gracias :)

In the recording the speaker says the word "fuera." But that answer was counted wrong and the correct answer was given as "fuese."

I think I saw an earlier lesson when you use bastante and other words only in a singular form. But I can't find the other lesson. Hopefully you can direct me to the lesson :)

In this lesson, peninsular Spanish is specified (however I am in the US and speak Spanish with Cubans, Mexicans, etc., so not only is this sort of new to me, it's not clear how useful it is). From what I've heard & read, there are many differences in the Americas in how the simple and compound past tenses are used (e.g., https://www.scribd.com/document/148697440/El-sistema-verbal-del-espanol-de-America-De-la-temporalidad-a-la-aspectualidad-Quesada-Pacheco-Espanol-actual-75-2001). If we include both peninsular and American (and other world) Spanish speakers, this is quite a range of variants. English speakers have a parallel set of past tenses in went/has gone. Obviously this is a false friend when compared to a specific dialect of Spanish such as the peninsular dialect (although I wonder how perfectly consistent this is across the peninsula). But is the English parallel any more “false” than the Ecuadorian, Peruvian, or Mexican one, relative to the peninsular one? How would a Spaniard respond if an American Spanish speaker consistently used the false English parallel to these tenses, compared to their response to an Ecuadorian, Peruvian, or Mexican speaker who consistently used their own native variant?

Thanks,

Greg Shenaut