Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Ser y Estar

  1. #1
    Grande Pollo en Boca Chica
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,796
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Ser y Estar

    A tip: P.L.A.C.E. for Estar:

    Position: expresses the physical position of posture of a person or thing:
    estar sentado estar levantado estar acostado

    Location: expresses where places, people, or things are located:
    estoy en Nueva York El libro está en la mesa

    Action: expresses the result of an action or the progressive
    el hombre está muerto estoy comiendo ahora

    Condition: expresses health and other changeable states
    estar enfermo estar sucio estar lleno

    Emotion: expresses emotions such as
    estar contento estar triste estar deprimido

  2. #2
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    497
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Always have been tought that:

    You use estar when you have something that can change (where you are, emotions,...

    and ser for something that is definitife like your nationality

    exception death

    it isn't "es meurto" but "esta muerto"

    Son loco los gentes que hablan español

  3. #3
    Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    339
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Your example about death is because of their beliefs. Most believe that after death one goes to heaven ect, so infact they are just in another life and not really gone at all, that is why the say esta muerta instead of es muerta.

  4. #4
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mofi
    Your example about death is because of their beliefs. Most believe that after death one goes to heaven ect, so infact they are just in another life and not really gone at all, that is why the say esta muerta instead of es muerta.
    Hey, I had never thought about it, but I think you are right! Most people do believe that death is a transition and that the non material component, consciousnes, the soul etc. goes into another dimension. Not necessarily "heaven", but that they are "there" somewhere or on the other side. I think that is a universal belief not limited to Spanish speakers, obviously, but it is a good theory. There are things or concepts behind the way one speaks that one is not always aware of.

  5. #5
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    995
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heldengebroed
    Always have been tought that:

    You use estar when you have something that can change (where you are, emotions,...

    and ser for something that is definitife like your nationality

    exception death

    it isn't "es meurto" but "esta muerto"

    Son loco los gentes que hablan español
    The reason this is problematic is because the transitory (estar) vs permanent (ser) explanation is an incomplete one when explaining the difference between the two verbs. For a some people there profession is transitory that changes during the course of their lives but we always use ser when talking about profession. Years ago I was a student (era estudiante), now I am not (soy ingeniero). I think best explanation I've gotten is that one deals with whatness (ser) and the other howness (estar). Él es muerto (what is he? a dead person) que está muerto (how is he? he is dead).

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    17,070
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I am Ok with 'ser' and 'estar' until I have to speak about something in the past. Fue/era? Which one is 'used to be' and 'was'?

  7. #7
    Moderadora 🇨🇺
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,723
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Chiri,

    If I said to you:

    1. Así era

    2. Así fue

    How would you translate that in English?

    The best way I can explain this in brief is:

    "era"- is used to describe repeated actions or continuous concepts in the past. Also used for general "decriptions" in the past.

    "fue"- sólo en algún momento dado. Usually there is a specific reference to time such as "ayer", "la semana pasada", "anoche" etc.


    LDG.


    Quote Originally Posted by Chirimoya
    I am Ok with 'ser' and 'estar' until I have to speak about something in the past. Fue/era? Which one is 'used to be' and 'was'?
    Last edited by Marianopolita; 04-25-2005 at 08:01 PM. Reason: to add more detail

  8. #8
    Silver
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    2,273
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Sorry but I still don't understand

    I need help in the use of the past tense for (was) and (were) i.e.:

    1. I was there yesterday.
    2. He was president in 1996.
    3. We were waiting for you.
    4. They were in Spain.
    5. Were you at the party?

    My understanding is that the past tense of estar and/or ser is fui, fuiste etc. but at the same time I hear estaba etc., AND I'M SO CONFUSED!

    Also what is the proper translation of (sin embargo)?

    Thanks.

  9. #9
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    512
    Post Thanks / Like

    Cool

    You have to understand that "Ser" y "Estar" in spanish are two completelly different verbs. In english we use "to be" to describe both, but in Spanish is a whole different history.

  10. #10
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    512
    Post Thanks / Like

    Cool

    I will say that a proper translation for "sin embargo" would be "even though"

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •