Spanish language Q&A Forum

I know ser means ‘to be’ in terms of characteristics and estar means ‘to be’ in temporary sense or in terms of location but why does this exercise use estar for ‘to be clear’ and ‘is cloudy’ but ser for ‘can be unstable’?

La narradora dice “las pilas” pero el texto dice “la pilas”, y el programa te corrige si escribes “las pilas” en tu transcripción. Me gusta esta expresión que no conocía antes. Creo que ya la entiendo, pero tal vez merezca una pequeña nota. ¡Gracias!

This example is wrong, no? Quizá Miguel no aprobara.

This is in the imperfect subjunctive. Shouldn't it be apruebe?

why is tenido sometimes with an accent on the nand sometimes without. The correct answer for this question was with an accent wheras another question using tenido was without. My collins dictionary says without. 

If I wanted to say 'i may be going away on that day'  would I use ir, irse or another verb? Also, would the verb be in the subjunctive?

Thanks in advance

i am having a hard time knowing which preposition to use ("of the", "by the", "from the", "to the", et al) 

Not to mention which indirect object pronoun goes before the other (She gives it to him in the morning "Ella se lo da por la mañana")?

I disagree strongly with the solution given on this question, and it seems to go directly against your own "quick lesson" if the answer is "era" -- the time frame is known and relevant because the palace was the home of a king with a specific reign, which would be known. Explícalo, por favor!