Way back in the times of the Latin language, there were two different verbs, but not with the same meaning as today:
sum, es, esse, fui1, meaning "to be" (Spanish: "ser", "estar", "haber"). This was the main copulative verb in old Latin, i.e. it was used to connect two words or clauses. It was used also as an auxiliary verb. We use haber ("to have") as ...
When you're speaking about the location where an event takes place then the verb "ser" is the one you have to use:
El partido será en el estadio.
El partido estará en el estadio.* (Incorrect)
El concurso de monólogos es en el pabellón número 5.
El concurso de monólogos está en el pabellón número 5.* (Incorrect)
if it's not an event (it's ...
This answer has grown enough to require an outline. Here it is:
"¿Qué hora es?" versus "¿Qué hora está?"*
"estar" versus "ser"
"a state" versus "an attribute"
"¿Qué hora es?" versus "¿Qué horas son?"
1. "¿Qué hora es?" versus "¿Qué hora está?"*
I feel tempted, like others, to write that Spanish uses the verb "ser" to ask the time, simply, because that's ...
It depends on the context of the question .
The verb "estar" in that phrase is commonly used for that particular moment.
Estoy feliz. (I am happy at the moment.)
However, "ser" can be used for quality or character of a person.
Soy feliz. (I'm a happy person.)
This is a stub for the answer. Feel free to collaborate, and remember to add links in case you add information coming from already answered questions.
If you want to go deeper into the roots of ser and estar, check out Etymologically, why do "ser" and "estar" exist? / Etimológicamente, ¿por qué existen "ser" ...
That's an interesting use of broma. You know that the verb ser does not need an article when the word following is an adjective:
El coche es azul.
Ha sido divertido.
In the case of broma, the word is classified as a noun by the RAE. An example of this usage:
Aquello fue una broma que me gastó mi hermano.
But in such sentences like es broma, that's ...
I think the answer is easy: what you think is the predicate is in fact the subject. The sentences are just inverted. If you turn them over, you get:
Los avisos son lo mejor de la televisión.
Los avisos son la mejor televisión.
Tú eres mi mejor amigo.
Vosotras sois mis mejores amigas.
¡Las rebajas son esto!
Los amigos son eso.
This way is easier to see that ...
(disclaimer, I'm a native Spanish speaker, so I find it funny that both 'ser' and 'estar' use a single word in some languages)
The point isn't that you sometimes use 'ser' and sometimes use 'estar'. They're two different concepts.
In short, "ser" relates to the very being of something, while "estar" is (usually) a temporary condition. That's why you say "...
"ser" + past participle in the present tense can be used in any passive context where the present is allowed. The difference with "estar" + past participle is that the former will indicate the process, while the latter will denote the state already reached (for this reason, the past participle after "estar" is always adjectival).
Let's analyze each example:
"Ser casado" can have two differnt "connotations"
The passive form. You are married BY someone. Check this Groucho Marx quote in Spanish and in English.
It can also mean "to be married" in sentences like "soy un hombre casado" (I'm a married man) although in specific that case, I would say it's a pre-made sentence. No one would say (at least in Spain, which ...
haber is used to talk about the existence of something, with that thing being a direct object. So if you could imagine yourself rewriting with existir, then haber is generally what you'll want to use. Note two small but important differences
the thing in question is the direct object with haber, but the subject with existir
¿Hay unas manzanas por ahí? ...
Permanent vs. temporary can be a useful shorthand for ser vs. estar, but it's also an oversimplification. According to Cisneros' "Spanish in Three Months", the various usages of ser vs estar can be broken down as follows:
identity - "Soy Carmen."
possession - "El perro es de Juan."
origin - "Son de Madrid."
nationality - "Somos ingleses."
occupation - ...
As shown by the comment and the answer above, I think we can define a rule for the alternate use of "estar" and "tener" when predicating a state about the subject:
"tener" will be used with an abstract noun as direct object or as the magnitude (whether implicitly or explicitly stated) to which a certain measurement or dimension refers.
"estar" will ...
I agree with Mauricio but would like to add something that might account for the presence of the article in this particular case.
Unlike most other nouns denoting occupation, religion, affiliation or social status, "santo" can be an adjective (Definition of santo).
The idiomatic expression "ser un santo / ser una santa" does not merely describe a person as ...
Why do ser and estar exist?
They have different roots, in particular the Spanish verb ser has multiple roots:
The infinitive (e.g. ser), the conditionals (e.g. sería) and the future form (e.g. seré) come from the Latin sedēre (present active infinitive of sedeō).
The other forms (e.g. es, fui) come from the Latin esse (present active infinitive of sum) or ...
The distinction is that the first sentence grammatically says "at this moment you are a naughty girl" This is incorrect.
What you mean happens in this example: you see the girl all "dolled up" in her prom dress or something like that. Then, you could say
[Tú] Estás preciosa [con ese vestido] You look beautiful in that dress/ the dress makes you beautiful ...
Both the following forms are common to refer to the status of havig been admitted:
El niño ha sido aceptado/admitido en la universidad
El niño está aceptado/admitido en la universidad
which means "the kid has been admitted to university". The first one sounds more correct to me, but Google shows that both are used on university websites.
According to the RAE in the entry for "ser" in the DICCIONARIO PANHISPÁNICO DE DUDAS, when the subject and predicate are nouns that differ in number, it is normal to match the verb ser with the plural element. There are a few cases when the singular is preferred, such as when the plural element actually refers to a singular concept. You can see some ...
This is one of those expressions that you should not try to translate from a language to another.
You are not actually asking about the time, but about the hour. That What time is it? is sort of Which is the hour? when asked in Spanish, so you are identifying one of the 24 moments in which we have divided the day. We are not identifying a property of time, ...
That would be an incomplete example. As you guess you can use both ser/estar.
It is not very good
If we refer to, for example a deal, we would use ser:
(el trato) no es muy bueno
If we refer to the condition of something, we would use estar:
¿Cómo está el coche? (meaning what is the condition of the car?)
No está muy bien.
¿Cómo está la ...
It doesn't matter if you say:
¿Que tal estuvo tu noche? or ¿Que tal fue tu noche?
Both mean the same, but fue is a little bit less formal.
Also notice that fue in this case, comes from the verb ir in the third person in the simple perfect preterite.
This is because the sentence means something like: how did your night go?
So, to end, the best verb to ...
There are indeed cases in Spanish in which the zero article is used with singular, countable nouns.
The examples at issue can take an indefinite article:
Es (una) broma.
Es (una) muy linda ciudad.
(1) seems to be a case in which the countable noun drops the article to become a category, almost as if it were an adjective, as opposed to "ser verdad":
No es ...
I would say this:
La colección es el contenedor que mantiene a los objetos.
Another example of this would be:
El total es la suma de cada uno de los elementos.
You follow the same grammar rules even though the noun may be a noun that describes a collection of something.
However you should pay attention to the following:
El total de personas es ...
It's just a matter of stress. If the stressed syllable is the first one, you don't write the accent. If it's the last one, you do.
You know, the rule states that "if the stress is in the last syllable and it ends in vowel, n or s, you must write the accent".
Besides, está and esté are forms of the verb estar, whereas esta and este are demonstratives or ...
In English the verb To be is used in both cases but in Spanish those are two completely different verbs with different meanings. The full explanation could be a long one but the short one using your example is like this.
"este está más barato" means that at this moment one article is cheaper that other in a temporary situation likely to change shortly, ...
Estar is always used for location, as it's not an inherent characteristic of physical things.
Don't think of ser as for permanent things rather for inherent, intrinsic, or essential qualities. Likewise, don't think of estar as for temporary things, but for accidental, extrinsic, or state-based qualities.
Consider this: I'm the same person no matter ...
To be a professor is a permanent characteristic, an attribute of the person, unrelated to their employment status. If you are a professor, you can be an unemployed professor, a professor working as a lumberjack, or whatever. You studied and became a professor. It's the same with all professions and trades; you use ser with them. Also, although it doesn't ...
In the DLE there is this meaning:
3. art. indet. Indica que lo denotado por el nombre o el grupo nominal al que precede no designa un individuo particular, sino un tipo. Un político debería tener una conducta ejemplar.
As the explanation says, "uno" (shortened as "un" before singular masculin sustantive) designates not a particular individual ...