use of "quedarse" & "alojarse"
Can you clear up a disagreement between myself and my wife please? 
Both of us have only been learning Spanish casually for less than a year, so neither of us know what we're talking about 
One of us thinks that you can only use alojarse if the sentence also includes the fact you're staying in a hotel etc.
the other thinks that by simply using alojarse, you are giving the listener more information, letting them know that you were staying somewhere like a hotel rather than with friends.
who is correct?
muchas gracias
6 Answers
Hi double, let's see if this won't become a divorce issue
One of us thinks that you can only use alojarse if the sentence also includes the fact you're staying in a hotel etc.
This in incorrect if you meant "only".
You can use both if you want to say "stay in a hotel, apartment etc"
Me quedé en un apartamento muy barato en Paris.
Me alojé en un hotel precioso.
Veamos el siguiente punto:
the other thinks that by simply using alojarse, you are giving the listener more information, letting them know that you were staying somewhere like a hotel rather than with friends.
Well, this is correct for me (Spain).
Even though you can use both words for staying with friends or a hotel, alojarse is somewhat more formal.
So, let's suppose I hear this:
Me alojé en un sitio muy bonito en Paris.
I would assume that this person stayed at a hotel.
As a conclusion:
here in Spain we hardly ever use alojarse. We use quedarse in both cases.
who is correct?
Just in case: B O T H :
You don't want to go there , amigo
Alojarse is to have accomodation. It could be used for hotels and a friend's house too. but I would say mostly in a hotel. Quedarse could be in both too but more in a friend's house. Quedarse is more (but not exclusively) when you don't pay.
Yo me quedé en lo de mi hermana cuando estuve en Bogotá. ( I wouldn't even think the person paid for it).
Yo me alojé en lo de mi hermana cuando estuve en Bogotá. (it's a little more refined)
In my country we use both. Then, both of you are right.
Hi, I am trying to understand this use of haber, as in the following example;
Varios familiares acusaron a las autoridades de no haber investigado todos los indicios sobre las muertes .<
This translates quite easily into English as not having investigated all the indications about the murders.
However what tense is it? And why have they not used 'han instead of haber? I don't remember reading about this.
Thank you for clarifying this!
Also, how do I manage to format in line spaces?
Hi Maisie, please open a separate thread for your question, click on "ask a question" .
It's "acusar a alguien" Accuse someone.
Acusar a alguien de hacer algo.
Acusar a la policía de pegar a los presos.
Acusar a Juan de robar mis cosas.
Acusar a Leticia de sacarme mi celular.
If it's negative:
Acusar a alguien de no hacer algo.
Acusar a la policía de no darle comida a los presos.
Acusar a mi marido de no traerme un regalo para mi cumpleaños.
Acusar a Juan de no decir la verdad.
Acusar a Leticia de no hacer sus tareas.
All the above is present. If it is to accuse somebody for having done something it's Acusar a alguien de haber hecho algo (haber + past participle)
Acusar a la policía de haber pegado a los presos ayer.
Acusar a Juan de haber robado mis cosas la semana pasada.
Acusar a Leticia de haberme sacado mi celular.
Negative
Acusar a alguien de no haber hecho nada.
Acusar a la policía de no haberle dado comida a los presos.
Acusar a mi marido de no haberme traído un regalo para mi cumpleaños.
Acusar a Juan de no haber dicho la verdad.
Acusar a Leticia de no haber hecho sus tareas.
This could be called perfect infinitive I guess.
Hello!
This link from 2009 might be answer to your question. 'Alojarse' or 'Quedarse'.
Hope this helps.
Regards!
