Spanish language Q&A Forum

The phrase "not be much for" is more idiomatic and translates to "not enjoy" or "not be in the habit of". I have never heard it used in the positive, however. You might say "He's not much for taking walks" to mean "He doesn't enjoy taking walks".  However, I have never heard something like "He's much for taking walks". There's a positive version that's a bit more enthusiastic: "to be a great one for".  For example, "He's a great one for playing practical jokes".

My CLAVE dictionary implies that the phrase "consist of ..." [in today's translation exercise "Thriving ecosystems in Costa Rica"] may be translated by "constar de ..." as well as by "consistir en ..." - but it implies that there is a subtle difference between them. If so, this might be worth mentioning?

In view of the explanation of "ir" vs. "irse" in this lesson, how would one contrast "irse" vs. "salir"

Is this use of ~Lo + Possessive Pronoun~ "To talk about minding one's own business," more akin  to entrometido o  metiche instead of "talking about one's own interests (which seems more relevant to the section antecedent: la pintura no es lo mio)?  Thank you.

What's the difference between "que" and "quien"

I don't understand why this is wrong:

"Los fontaneros, ________ vienen esta tarde, van a arreglar el grifo."

Why is it "que" insteda of "quien"?

I would say that it is 99% certain it is the Gypsy Kings, but i cannot seem to identify the track a the start of the video, as it is so similar to Canastero but it is different, more upbeat. Please can you tell me the track