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 ...
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 ...
"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:
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 ...
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 ...
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.
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 cena? (meaning ...
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 ...
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 ...
As a general rule, "ser" is used for permanent conditions and "estar", for temporary conditions.
1) You can say: "Este equipo está muy bueno" to mean that, considering its current composition or performance, you find it is playing fine or it is in a position to play well. Please note that "estar" expresses in this, as well as in all other cases where it is ...
There's at least one study¹ about the use of the copulas ser and estar (in Puerto Rican Spanish) that, among other things, finds that more than a few adjectives that are normally predicated with ser can also occur with estar and that this is associated with the speaker having a personal, immediate experience with the referent. That is, if you have
Como le he comentado a Gustavson, barajaba la posibilidad de que el participio de presente (o activo) del verbo ser fuera ente. Y buscando un poco he dado con un artículo de la Fundéu que dice:
El participio activo del verbo ser no es ente. El único participio que actualmente tienen, de forma general, los verbos españoles, es el de perfecto (por ejemplo ...
Verdad is a noun, Cierto is an adjective.
In practice, they can be used almost interchangeably. Just make sure the syntax is correct for the type of word you're using ;)
Es cierto // Es la verdad // Es verdad
Lo cierto es que... // La verdad es que...
Es cierto lo que dices // Es verdad lo que dices...
However, some constructs will only appear one way:
In my opinion, it should be the first one, but actually, it could be both depending on the case.
I guess that wine cellars, in general, have to be dark and dry. So if you are talking about a general case it should be the first one. Let's put it this way:
All wine cellars should be dark and dry.
Las bodegas deberían ser oscuras y secas.
In the other hand, ...
I would go with ser:
El jueves era el día que cenábamos pizza cuando yo era pequeño.
Los jueves eran los días que cenábamos pizza.
We use ser to refer when a event takes place.
El domingo es el día de ir a misa.
You use estar bien/mal with people, things, places and situations that are good/bad and can change that state during time. You use es bueno/malo for (usually) permanent qualities, as being a good person or a nice place to stay.
Está muy bien is most of the time "S/he/it very well". Examples:
¿Cómo está el coche? (preguntándole a tu mecánico)
Está muy bien. ...