# ser/estar lleno de



## estebaninglaterra

digo 'el puesto de un periodista esta lleno de variedad' o 'es lleno...'

saludos
Stephen


----------



## Bilma

Está lleno de variedad

es muy variado --I prefer this one.


----------



## Alificacion

"Lleno" is a state, not a permanent quality, so you never use "ser".

"Es+adjective" means that the subject is always like that, and it's a permanent (or long-term) quality that it has: Juan es alto (and he will always be), Ana es simpática (and we expect her to keep on being nice), María es economista (and she will keep on being until she finds another job).

"El autobús está lleno": in a few minutes it may be empty again, so it's not a permanent state.


----------



## stephen woolf

¿Y porque puedo decir "El libro de matemàticas està lleno de ejercicios?"
Esta es una característica constante en mi opinión..


----------



## Marabunta

Me resulta difícil explicarlo pero el verbo llenar, como el verbo vaciar implica un proceso. Una cosa está vacía y se va llenando. O está llena y se va vaciando. Hasta que está llena o vacía. "Lleno" y "vacío" (adjetivos) siempre con el verbo "estar"


----------



## Corky Ringspot

Hello - _Londres __está lleno de museos

_This sounds right, but why not _era _? 

Thanks for help.


----------



## geostan

First, let me say that the tenses do not match. *Era* is imperfect, *está* is present. 

That said, the adjective* lleno* is time-dependent, i.e., it could change from moment to moment. Hence estar is the appropriate choice.


----------



## Corky Ringspot

Yeah, silly of me - I meant _estaba, _sorry. But how can London be full of museums one minute and not the next? Unless you mean that _lleno _is time-dependent over very long periods (in the course of which even things like museums can come and go)? Am I making sense?!


----------



## geostan

Your reasoning is very logical. And indeed, one can find all kinds of sentences on the internet with "es lleno de." I guess we'll have to leave it up to the native speakers.


----------



## Otaku_SIG

"Londres estaba lleno de museos" is like talking about a past Londres, where there were museums. "Estaba X" implies that that "X" state is no longer valid. So now, there are no museums in London. 
You can never say "es lleno de". It doesn't make sense, because everything that's full of something could be emptied.


----------



## sal62

It´s hard to explan the difference. Maybe you must think about the difference between state and qualtiy
the state could change in itslef or not, but the qualities would be replaced  by others.
Think about that part of the work that "estar" does,is performed in english by ver verbs stand and still, with which, estar shares a common origin.
The good example that geostan gave you, can´t be understood in such taxative way,
The concept of museum don´t change, because in "es un museo"  its cuality is being a museum.
but if were an itinerant museum: you are able to say:
It is a museum and it is in London, so in spanish you must say: es un museo y está en Londres.
Obviously It is not only a matter of place.
Saludos.


----------



## ampurdan

"Lleno" generally takes "estar", even for things that can only change during long periods of times, like museums in a city. I doubt that any native spaker would say "Londres es/era lleno de museos".

However, in some cases "lleno" actually takes "ser", like in the Catholic prayer "Llena eres de gracia". I guess the one who translated it from Latin did not like the implications of "estás".


----------



## sal62

ampurdan, no será al contrario:
La gracia de María es una cualidad, además de un estado. y por eso debe haberse usado ser en vez de estar. Lo digo desde mi cuasi ateísmo. Alguien con conocimientos teológicos nos iluminará.


----------



## ampurdan

De un cuasi-ateo a otro: me habré expresado mal, porque lo que estás diciendo es lo que quería decir yo.


----------



## sal62

Seguro que yo leí mal. pero el tuyo es un buen punto, porque en este caso, desde lo teológico María es y está a la vez.
Saludos.


----------



## kriptoN

_Londres está lleno de museos_: Now, at present, there are a lot of museums.
_Londres estaba lleno de museos_: Means that in the past there were a lot of museums, but now in London there are a lot of museums or maybe not.


----------



## Otaku_SIG

kriptoN said:


> _Londres estaba lleno de museos_: Means that in the past there were a lot of museums, *but now in London there are a lot of museums *or maybe not.



Humm... no. With "estaba" you're saying that now there are no museums.

I think I've got a clear example for SER/ESTAR:

- The sea is blue. El mar es azul. That's the way it is.

But, imagine there's a disaster and a petroleoum ship covers a beach with oil.

- The sea is black. El mar está negro. It is blue, but now, it is black. It looks black, but we all know it's blue... if we clean it, it will turn back to blue.

And of course, you can close every museum in London and it will still be London. So, ESTAR. Because London is (ES) London, and it is (ESTÁ) full of museums.


----------



## kriptoN

Otaku_SIG said:


> Humm... no. With "estaba" you're saying that now there are no museums.


With "estaba" maybe now there are museums or maybe not. That in the past there were a lot of museums not means that now there aren't a lot of museums.


----------



## ampurdan

I beg to disagree. "Estaba" does not tell us anything about the present.


----------



## Otaku_SIG

ampurdan said:


> I beg to disagree. "Estaba" does not tell us anything about the present.



It doesn't, but talking about something so unlikely to fade away as every museum in the city... 
I see your point, but I think I'm seeing the sentence from a different point of view. What I mean is:

- If someone tells me "Londres estaba lleno de museos", and he's in London, I understand something has happened to the museums and they are not there anymore.
- If someone tells me "Londres estaba lleno de museos" because he's talking about a trip he's done (if recently, "Londres está" would be perfect too), so now he's not in there, it certainly doesn't give me information about now.

I was thinking about the first situation... can you see it? Sorry if I misunderstood the meaning then.


----------



## ampurdan

Sure, this sentence in different contexts may imply different things, but lacking any context, the sentence itself does not tell us anything about the present.


----------



## kriptoN

I'm agree with ampurdan.


----------



## sal62

Londres está lleno de museos =London is full of museum
londres es llenado de museos por decisión de la reina= London is filled by Queen´s decision (awful example but gramatically correct)


----------



## geostan

sal62 said:


> Londres está lleno de museos =London is full of museum
> londres es llenado de museos por decisión de la reina= London is filled by Queen´s decision (awful example but gramatically correct)



Yes, but llenado is not being used as an adjectve, but rather a past participle, in a passive sentence.


----------



## Peterdg

kriptoN said:


> I'm agree with ampurdan.


 (No sé de donde viene, pero es un error que veo a menudo, sobre todo de francófonos.)


----------



## kriptoN

Peterdg said:


> (No sé de donde viene, pero es un error que veo a menudo, sobre todo de francófonos.)


Thank you! I usually have this mistake.. silly of me!


----------

