Spanish language Q&A Forum

Hi, I think the explanation above is misleading as I don't understand the difference among the three forms. The examples given also seem to show they can be used interchangeably, but It doesn't seem to be the case when I looked at the discussion. Grammar is my weak point, so the explanation regarding tenses still leaves me confused. Can I get a strong example of when to use which?

Why is “Las voces” translated as “Those voices” instead of “The voices?”

It is easier to think of the translations of these phrases in formal (or correct) English.

En lo que        As far as

Con lo que     with that which

Para lo que    for that which

de lo que       of that which

Por lo que      because of what

a lo que          to that which

And don't encourage bad English.  "You can never place the preposition at the end of the clause like in English:  Be careful what you wish for."  You should never end with a preposition in English  Be careful of that which you wish   or Be careful for what you wish.

1. What's the difference between tu and vosotros.

2. I would like to start Spanish from LKG level. I learn from here and there. I would like to have a systematic study. How could kwizuq help me?

Why isn't it sigues when verás is used. Is it Tú or Usted?

The use of por instead of para in the sentence: "Puse todo de mi parte por que no termináramos separados." (with the given English translation "I did my best so that we wouldn't end up being apart.") is confusing and appears inaccurate to me. 

This question was asked 5 years ago with a response from Inma from Kwiziq that both por and para are correct here. However, por que + subjunctive appears highly idiosyncratic and I cannot find support for this construction anywhere. I checked this with two native Spanish speaking friends and a native Spanish speaking tutor and all agreed they would never say this sentence and that it was not grammatically correct. "Por no terminar" seems defensible and also sounds natural again to me and native speaking friends.

Consulting with Butt et al. 2019 ( p. 509) supports the use of por with an infinitive interchangeably with para but not in the way used in the Kwiziq example sentence and definitely not with a subjunctive following. Some verbs take por and could be followed by a subjunctive (e.g., luchar por) but this does not seem generalizable across verbs.

Can you please clarify and/or correct this in the lesson to avoid further confusion?

--

38.17.16 He venido por hablarle or para hablarle?

Both prepositions may translate ‘to’ or ‘in order to’ in sentences like ‘I’ve come to talk to you’. Insome cases, they are virtually interchangeable:

¿Para qué has venido? What have you come for?

¿Por qué has venido? Why have you come?

Estoy aquí para/por verlo/le I’ve come to see him

...

(1) Important: if an English sentence can be rewritten using a phrase like ‘out of a desire to’ or ‘from an urge to’, then por can be used. If not, para is indicated.

References:

1.  Butt J, Benjamin C, Rodríguez AM. A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish 6ed. London ; New York: Routledge; 2019.  215-955-6627 1 3 

I'm fascinated by these constructions and how they mirror English so well in terms of ''She went and started dancing on the table'', ''After they had everything prepared for the wedding, Luis (only) goes and breaks up with her!". I've never seen them before, and it has me wondering, - are they newer constructions in Spanish, due to contact with English, or have they been around for the last 20 or 30 years at least?

The test answer is “conforme” but it should be “conforme a” según la lección. ?

I was surprised that this sentence took "sido" and not "estado". As the speaker is talking about their emotional state over a specific time period, rather than their personalities more generally, would "estar" not be used over "ser"?