Why estar and not ser for distance between two places?
Hola! Hello.
I am just doing some lessons on Fluencia, and came across this sentence:
The park is far away from the subway station El parque está lejos de la estaciòn de metro
I'm just wondering why estar is used here and not ser. Surely the location of the park and the station are not changing, and so the long distance between them is not temporary?
Is it just that estar is used for location (except parties) regardless of temporary/permanent etc?
Thank you for your help!
8 Answers
I am tired of writing this myself, over and over. So :
http://www.drlemon.com/Grammar/servsestar.html
You may have heard that Ser is used for things which are permanent and Estar is used for things which are temporary. This is an over-simplification and not a good way to think of these verbs because you will end up with a lot of exceptions and confusion.
Try to forget you ever heard that. It is better to remember that Ser pertains to Identity (with all of its elements) and that Estar pertains to States of Being: Condition, Location, and Motion (the Present Progressive.)
Some examples- Cuando era niño- clearly that was not permanent or why era, Él está muerto- clearly that is, at least for most people.
Picking up on Bosquederoble's point, I'll never forget the example given by Michel Thomas in his audio course: 'estar borracho' means 'to be drunk' whereas 'ser borracho' means 'to be a drunk'... !!
Remember that example, & it may help you avoid mistaking one for the other.
Daniela - With location it's always estar.
¿Estás segura? Jeje
La reunión es en Nueva Zelanda.
La recepción de la boda fue en su casa.
El partido será en la capital de Colombia.
¿Dónde es él concierto?
Unfortunately with grammar we often find that so called grammar 'rules' are better viewed as 'guidelines' as they nearly always have exceptions, I too have been caught out saying 'always' in reference to some grammar point but now I have learnt to say 'nearly always' because even if I haven't ever come across the exception there very likely will be at least one lol.
Don't forget that the past participle of "estar" is "estado" State. From which we get Los Estados Unidos. The United States
Also this temporary/permanent business throws a lot of learners off.
Like I can be a teacher today and maybe tomorrow an airline hostess. Does that mean I have to say "Estoy profesora" No way, José.
The rule for predicate nominatives is "ser" This deals with occupations and anything else.
"Ositos" es un perro de lanas" Pierre su dueño es un buen hombre.
We also use ser/and estar to establish a "characteristic vs. state or condition,
La puerta es grande. --a characteristic. La puerta está abierta--a conditon.
Estar is also used to speak of physical or mental states/conditions.
Pedro está enfermo. Pete is sick. María está triste, Mary is sad.
With location it's always estar. You can have one thing in another-- for example.
Mi casa está en la ciudad de Los Angeles, Los Angeles está en el Condado de Los Angeles. El Condado de los Angeles está en el Estado de California, etc,etc.
There are a few more rules. If requested I could put up one of my easy to read lessons on the site as a Question.
¡Ser y estar me vuelven loca!
Your sample sentence does not really deal with the distance between two locations but rather the location of the park in relation to the other location.
The park is far away from the subway station.
It is ten kilometers from the park to the subway station. Hay diez kilometros entre el parque y la estación del metro. This sentence deals with the distance between the two and uses niether ser nor estar.
Although it is a good learning tool to think of estar meaning to be in a temporary sense, it might help as well if you are aware that estar it related to the English word stand (or to be in a place) through Proto Indo European as is evidenced in the Latin root "stare" meaning to stand.
Mnemonic device: e sta r / sta nd
Yes, I think you have to use 'estar' with locations regardless on their permanence. I did wonder this myself when I first came across this kind of expression, e.g. 'la montaña está lejos del río'. Instinctively 'ser' feels more logical because the mountain and river aren't going to change positions in relation to each other, but because you're expressing location, it's 'estar'...
I forgot one exception on ser/estar. It really isn't an exception. It has its own rule.
The location of an event is marked by the use of ser.
Example. La clase de la Señora López es en el edificio de humanidades.
You can't touch or feel a class. you can touch a student or a teacher or a chair, but you can't touch a class. It has a beginning and an ending, and over a certain length of time.
Same with a concert. El concierto es en el parque a las siete de la noche.
You can touch the musicians. you can touch the instrument. you can touch a member of the audience but you can't touch a concert. It's a concept, an event.
Los estudiantes y su profesora están en la sala de clase
Los músicos y sus instrumentos están en el parque.
