Spanish language Q&A Forum

Hi, I was organizing my tenses chart and realize there's only "Pretérito perfecto simple" that can find "fui" in both ser and estar. I cannot find a page that shows "El Pretérito Indefinido", I'm wondering are this two tenses the same thing?

Thanks,

Hayley

One question on a quiz I just took was something like 

 _________ menos me impresiona del cuadro es el color. (What impresses me least about this picture is the color.) 

I entered 'Lo que el,' which was wrong.  The correct response was 'Lo que.'  To me, this seems to mean 'What impresses me less..., ' and it strikes me as a tricky combination of the lessons about 'lo que, etc', and 'el menos/la menos etc.'  The lesson that I was referred to for review was the 'lo que etc.' lesson, but I found no example of it used immediately followed by a superlative.  

It's been my understanding that an article is required to form a superlative (as in - menos=less, el/la/los/las/lo menos=the least).  So it seems that the superlative article gets dropped immediately after 'lo que?'  What if the sentence had been constructed slightly differently, 'Lo que me impresiona el menos del cuadro es el color?' 

There is a test question that goes like this: 

¿Qué viaje prefieres comprar? Prefiero ________.Which trip do you prefer to buy? That one over there.

The correct answer is "aquel". However, this doesn't make sense to me, as a trip isn't a thing you can see/touch. It's a series of connected actions (traveling from point A to B, seeing things, doing things) and as such seems more of an abstract concept or idea than a physical thing like a coat or a skirt. 

According to the lesson text, the proper use of "aquello" is when referring to an idea. As such, I would choose "aquello" as the pronoun.

Am I interpreting the use of "aquello" incorrectly, or is the answer wrong?

Does "postre" literally mean "pudding desert" as us suggested by the test answer? I would have thought another word would have been needed, or perhaps "flan" would have worked instead of "postre"?

can we say ha venido a quedarse instead of using para?

In this question, would both of these answers be correct for: How would you say "The little girls who I went to the park with were your daughters."?

Las niñas con las que fui al parque eran tus hijas.

Las niñas para las que fui al parque eran tus hijas.

This sentence sounds more like do not come back with that girl... could I say No vueulvas a esa chica?

Hola,

I still struggle with the whole ser and estar rules but I cannot see why ser is used in this sentence. If it means "I am not (by nature) the kind of person who will take risks" then "ser" would fit, but that is not at all obvious from the sentence. The translation offered was "I will not be too daring" [or something like that] which to me suggests that she was adopting a cautious strategy in the game, to avoid being embarrassed. Hence a temporary / changeable state. 

Can you clarify this for me please?

Thanks. John

In the above example the English translation refers to “she”, but am I correct, that there is nothing in the spanish 

sentence that refers to a “she”? In fact, wouldn’t “le” normally default to the masculine?