# está aburrida/es aburrida



## ChocolateLover

Hola a todos:

¿Me podrían decir si la información en español está bien, por favor?

Hoy la clase está muy aburrida (en comparación con las demás)=The class is very boaring today(in comparison to the other classes)

La clase es aburrida=the class is boaring (siempre lo es)

Muchas gracias


----------



## Makser

ChocolateLover said:


> Hola a todos:
> 
> ¿Me podrían decir si la información en español está bien, por favor?
> 
> Hoy la clase está muy aburrida (en comparación con las demás)=The class is very boaring today(in comparison to the other classes)
> 
> La clase es aburrida=the class is boaring (siempre lo es)
> 
> Muchas gracias


 
Hola ChocolateLover:

Yo no distinguiría en mi español entre esas dos frases y diría tanto 
_Hoy la clase es muy aburrida._
_La clase es siempre muy aburrida._

Nunca diría _La clase está muy aburrida._

En todo caso, en el primer caso podrías decir

_Hoy la clase está siendo muy aburrida_, queriendo decir que no lo es siempre sino solamente hoy.

Un saludo


----------



## dexterciyo

Para mí:

_La clase de hoy está muy aburrida, y solamente hoy.
La clase de matemáticas es muy aburrida, y siempre lo ha sido._

"La clase está muy aburrida" me hace pensar que se refiere a los estudiantes de la clase, y no a la lección.


----------



## OHSU

This is YET ANOTHER of those instances where the temporary/permanent "rule" fails. (I know it is a widely taught and accepted "rule" of Spanish grammar, but it really isn't very useful for helping non-natives generate grammatically accurate, meaningful sentences.  It's a shame we've all had it pounded into our heads.) _Ser/estar aburrido_ falls very neatly into the condition/attribute guideline.

_Estar aburrido/a_ is translated as "is bored" (condition), while _ser aburrido/a_ is translated as "is boring" (attribute).

_Los alumnos están aburridos. _= The students are bored. (The condition of the students is that they're bored.)

_La clase es aburrida. =_ The class is boring. (An attribute of the class is that it is boring.)


----------



## OHSU

dexterciyo said:


> "La clase está muy aburrida" me hace pensar que se refiere a los estudiantes de la clase, y no a la lección.


 
EXACTLY! This is exactly what I thought, too.

Let's think about this for a minute. Logically speaking the content of a lecture can't be "bored". It can be "boring", but not "bored". And when you use _estar _with _aburrida, _you naturally interpret _aburrida_ as a condition: "bored". If a "class" is "bored", then "class" must refer to the *people in the class*, because that's the only interpretation of "class" that can have the condition of boredom. "The class is bored", would mean, "The (students in the) class is (are) bored".

_La clase está aburrida. = Los alumnos están aburridos. _(Bored, condition)
_La clase es aburrida. = El contenido de la clase es aburrido._ (Boring, attribute)


----------



## Makser

OHSU said:


> EXACTLY! This is exactly what I thought, too.
> 
> Let's think about this for a minute. Logically speaking the content of a lecture can't be "bored". It can be "boring", but not "bored". And when you use _estar _with _aburrida, _you logically interpret _aburrida_ as a condition: "bored". If a "class" is "bored", then "class" logically must refer to the *people in the class*, because that's the only logical interpretation of "class" that can have the condition of boredom. "The class is bored", would mean, "The students in the class are bored".
> 
> _La clase está aburrida. = Los alumnos están aburridos. _(Bored, condition)
> _La clase es aburrida. = El contenido de la clase es aburrido._ (Boring, attribute)


 
You're quite right OHSU,

That's why I didn't even think about _the class_ as the *people in the class*, I understood he meant *the lesson* itself. And of course, the lesson can't be bored (no puede estar aburrida).

Un saludo.


----------



## Ushuaia

Incluso si siempre hablamos de "la clase" como "the lesson", en este caso puede tanto ser como estar aburrida. 

La clase puede ser casi siempre divertida y *hoy estar aburrida*; como la pizza de un restaurante puede ser sabrosa y hoy estar sosa, o una persona puede ser alegre y hoy estar malhumorada. 
_
La fiesta, la clase, la tarde, la película está aburrida_ son frases muy habituales en castellano, como intuías, ChocolateLover, y como te señalaron los compañeros.


----------



## Makser

Tienes razón en lo que dices Ushuaia pero su pregunta era si el uso de ser o estar implicaba un significado puntual o habitual (al menos así lo entendí yo y de ahí mi respuesta):

La clase está muy aburrida hoy.
La clase es muy aburrida siempre.

En mi opinión no es así.
Una comida de un restaurante puede ser sabrosa siempre y puede estar sabrosa siempre. O pueder estar sosa hoy o ser una comida sosa hoy.


----------



## e-hime

La respuesta de OHSU es la que yo hubiera dado pero es cierto lo que apunta Makser



Makser said:


> Tienes razón en lo que dices Ushuaia pero su pregunta era si el uso de ser o estar implicaba un significado puntual o habitual (al menos así lo entendí yo y de ahí mi respuesta):
> 
> La clase está muy aburrida hoy.
> La clase es muy aburrida siempre.
> 
> En mi opinión no es así.
> Una comida de un restaurante puede ser sabrosa siempre y puede estar sabrosa siempre. O pueder estar sosa hoy o ser una comida sosa hoy.



Hoy es una comida sosa = hoy tocó una comida sosa (en el comedor de un colegio, por ejemplo)

Lo digo para ponerlo un poco en contexto, porque hasta a mí se me hace raro leer eso de "hoy es una comida sosa", aunque sea perfectamente correcto


----------



## Ushuaia

Makser said:


> La clase está muy aburrida hoy.
> La clase es muy aburrida siempre.
> 
> En mi opinión no es así.



Entendí la pregunta, pero en mi opinión sí es así. 

La clase estaba aburrida = Aquel día, la clase fue aburrida.
La clase era aburrida = La clase era siempre aburrida.

-¿Estuvo divertida la clase?
-Sí, ¡esa clase siempre es divertida!

-El domingo estuvo entretenido, pero mis domingos suelen ser aburridos.

Quizás tenga que ver con el uso de cada región; por acá "la clase/película/tarde está aburrida" es muy habitual.


----------



## Makser

Será un uso regional seguramente, pero a mi se me hace muy raro eso de decir _la película está muy aburrida._

Un saludo.


----------



## ChocolateLover

Muchas gracias a todos

En fin, ¿en Latinoamérica se puede decir "La clase/la película...está aburrida"(boring) mientras que en España se dice "la clase/la película...es aburrida (siempre/hoy) (boring)?

¿Hay otras opiniones?

Muchas gracias y felices fiestas


----------



## OHSU

ChocolateLover said:


> En fin, ¿en Latinoamérica se puede decir "La clase/la película...está aburrida"(boring) mientras que en España se dice "la clase/la película...es aburrida (siempre/hoy) (boring)?


 
No, I would not draw that conclusion from this discussion.

Latin America is a huge place with hundreds of millions of speakers in dozens of countries, and it would not be rational to conclude that any kind of a consensus about Latin American Spanish (if such a monolithic entity can be argued to exist) has been represented here by the one or two posters who maintain that _está aburrida_ is a normal way of expressing "is boring".

Based on the people who have chimed in with explanations of formal grammar, and the native speakers who have given their opinion, the consensus would suggest that _está aburrida_ is *normally* interpreted as "is bored" while _es aburrida _is *normally* interpreted as "is boring", regardless of the time frame involved.

Someone is always going to disagree, but if you want a "rule" that is going to give you formally "correct" sentences that are acceptable to most speakers, in most countries, most of the time, that's your rule.


----------



## ChocolateLover

*En general*, en Latinoamérica se puede decir "La clase/la película...está aburrida"(boring) mientras que en España se dice "la clase/la película...es aburrida (siempre/hoy) (boring)?

¿Hay mas opiniones?

Gracias


----------



## Makser

ChocolateLover said:


> *En general*, en Latinoamérica se puede decir "La clase/la película...está aburrida"(boring) mientras que en España se dice "la clase/la película...es aburrida (siempre/hoy) (boring)?
> 
> ¿Hay mas opiniones?
> 
> Gracias


 

Lo siento ChocolateLover, yo no me atrevería a hacer esa afirmación. Sólo he hablado por *mi* mismo, e incluso hasta puedo estar equivocado. Llevo días dándole vueltas a esta discusión intentando buscar ejemplos preguntando a la gente si les parece habitual ese uso del verbo *estar*. 
He encontrado ejemplos en los que reconocería como normal (siempre para mi y mi español en el País Vasco).
Ayer fui a ver AVATAR y hablando sobre la película podría decir:

Esta película *está *de lo más aburrida/o. 
(aún pensando que podría decirlo me sigue sonando un poco raro)
pero el caso es que también podría decir y seguramente diría en el 99% de los casos
Esta película *es *de lo más aburrida/o.
Y volviendo a la pregunta original, en *mi *opinión el uso de *ser* o *estar *no implica algo habitual o puntual.
Si fuera una exclamación se me hace muy difícil usar el verbo *estar*:

¡*Es *aburridísima!
¡*Está *aburridísima! 

Bueno amigos, yo no pretendo discutir con nadie y me interesa mucho aprender todas estas variantes de algo tan "sencillo"? y sobre todo tan habitual como puede ser el uso de verbos tan comunes como *ser* y *estar*. Es lo grande de este foro. Aunque a veces creo que para el que aprende una lengua todo esto quizá le traiga más confusión que aclaración por lo que voy a dar por terminada mi participación en este hilo y me uno a ChocolateLover en la espera de otras opiniones.

Un saludo.


----------



## juandiego

I'd say that the only situation in which you could say _"La pelicula *está* aburrida"_ in Spain, would be just while you are watching it, and even so, I think we'd tend to say _"la pelicula *está siendo* aburrida"_.

The same could be said of the class context.


----------



## OHSU

ChocolateLover said:


> *En general*, en Latinoamérica se puede decir "La clase/la película...está aburrida"(boring) mientras que en España se dice "la clase/la película...es aburrida (siempre/hoy) (boring)?
> 
> ¿Hay mas opiniones?
> 
> Gracias


 
The dichotomy you're trying to establish here between presently boring vs. always boring is *generally *an INACCURATE way to apply s_er vs. estar_. This is true in Latin America as well as in Spain.

If you search hard enough for examples, you'll occassionally find a circumstance in which some native Spanish speakers will find _está aburrida _acceptible for "is boring", but most of the time it will come across awkward-sounding.

The "rule" that we've been taught in our grammar classes that *estar is supposedly for temporary situations while ser is supposedly for permanent situations is a POOR and often UNHELPFUL guideline* for us non-native speakers to use in formulating accurate, meaningful phrases.

*A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish, Second Edition; John Butt & Carmen Benjamin: 1995: Chapter 29, pg. 375*

"Basically, _ser_ denotes nature or identity, while _estar_ denotes condition, state, or place. ... *It is misleading to imagine that estar refers to temporary states while ser indicates permanence.*" (emphasis mine)


The temporary/permanent "rule" fails as often as it holds true, and in tricky situations, like the one you've presented here, it doesn't provide any help at all. I know that native Spanish speakers refer to temporary/permanent *restrospectively* when explaining why they used _ser_ vs. _estar_ in some situations, but that is a very different situation from the one we non-natives face when trying to decide how to construct a meaningful phrase in the first place.

A much more useful guideline than temporary/permanent is condition/attribute. *Generally speaking*, adjectives like the ones below indicate an attribute when used with _ser_ and a condition when used with _estar_. Moreover, the meaning of the adjective is sometimes _significantly _different, such as the change from "boring" to "bored", "tiring" to "tired", etc.

(examples taken from Butt & Benjamin, chapter 29)

_ser aburrido_ = boring; _estar aburrido_ = bored
_ser cansado_ = tiring; _estar cansado_ = tired
_ser consciente_ = aware; _estar consciente_ = conscious
_ser despierto_ = mentally sharp/alert; _estar despierto_ = awake
_ser interesado_ = self-seeking; _estar interesado_ = interested
_ser listo_ = clever; _estar listo_ = ready
_ser orgulloso_ = prideful person; _estar orgulloso_ = proud (of something)
_ser torpe_ = slow-witted; _estar torpe_ = clumsy, difficulty moving
_ser verde_ = green, smutty, embarrasing (and many other colloquial uses); estar verde = unripe
_ser vivo_ = mentally sharp/alert; _estar vivo_ = alive

The distinction between attribute/condition is highlighted by the fact that natives sometimes feel the need to insert the indefinite article after _ser_ in some cases.

ser (un) enfermo = an invalid; estar enfermo = ill
ser (un) loco = scatterbrained; estar loco = crazy, mad

The situation you seem to be looking for where _estar_ can be translated as having the definition typically associated with _ser_ is explained by an interesting function of _estar_, wherein it connotes an *impression* or a *change in condition*. This seems to be the situation JuanDiego is describing. I'd bet just about anything that if we fleshed out the use of _estar_ in this sense and applied it here, he and other native speakers would agree that this is the case.

(If anyone wants me to go into what I mean by "impression or change in condition" with _estar_, just ask and I will. If nobody cares, I'll keep it to myself since it's a bit off-topic.)


----------



## ChocolateLover

Muchas gracias a todos

¿Hay mas opiniones de los hispanohablantes de Latinoamerica? Me parece que este ejemplo es tal vez lo mismo que el hecho de que en España se suele decir "Los zapatos son muy bonitos", mientras que en Latinoamerica se suele decir "Los zapatos estan muy bonitos" (haciendo una comparacion con los demas zapatos). 



> Incluso si siempre hablamos de "la clase" como "the lesson", en este caso puede tanto ser como estar aburrida.
> 
> La clase puede ser casi siempre divertida y *hoy estar aburrida*; como la pizza de un restaurante puede ser sabrosa y hoy estar sosa, o una persona puede ser alegre y hoy estar malhumorada.
> _
> La fiesta, la clase, la tarde, la película está aburrida_ son frases muy habituales en castellano, como intuías, ChocolateLover, y como te señalaron los compañeros.


 
Muchas gracias


----------



## OHSU

ChocolateLover said:


> Me parece que este ejemplo es tal vez lo mismo que el hecho de que en España se suele decir "Los zapatos son muy bonitos", mientras que en Latinoamerica se suele decir "Los zapatos estan muy bonitos" (haciendo una comparacion con los demas zapatos).


 
The construction _Los_ _zapatos están muy_ _bonitos_ is no more common in Latin American than in Peninsular Spanish. It *isn't technically wrong* to say _Los zapatos están bonitos_, but the circumstances in which it would be appropriate are *limited*, and they *do not include* merely suggesting a *comparison* with other shoes. This is true for BOTH Latin American Spanish AND Peninsular Spanish.

_Los zapatos son bonitos._
_Estos zapatos son bonitos, pero los demás son feos._
_Estos zapatos son bonitos en comparación con los demás._

There is no indication for using _estar_ in any of these.

In BOTH Latin American Spanish AND Peninsular Spanish _estar_ can be used with adjectives that typically call for _ser_ (adjectives of nature, identity, or attribute) when the speaker wants to emphasize that a *change has taken place*. _Estar_ may also be used to convey some kind of *emotional reaction* such as surprise, pleasure/displeasure, etc. _Estar_ can also be used when the speaker wants to emphasize that he is expressing his *impression* rather than making a definitive statement about the absolute nature of something. Quite often, the appropriate English translation of this use of _estar_ calls for something other than "is", such as "seems, appears, looks, tastes, has become, is getting".

(Examples taken from Butt & Benjamin [1995], pg. 380)

_*Es* muy guapa._ = She is very attractive.
_*Está* muy guapa._ = She is looking very attractive.

_Este niño *es* muy alto. = _This child is very tall. 
_Este niño *está* muy alto._ = This child has grown very tall.

_*Es* muy joven. _= He is very young.
_*Está* muy joven. _= He looks/is looking very young.

_¡Qué fuerte *eres*! = _How strong you are!
_¡Qué fuere *estás*!_ = How strong you've become!

_Este sillón *es* ya viejo._ = This armchair is old.
_Este sillón *está* ya viejo. =_ This armchair is getting old.

_El pollo *es* riquísimo._ = Chicken is very good. (Generally speaking, chicken is very good.)
_El pollo *está* riquísimo. = _The chicken tastes delicious.

_El café *es* horrible_. = Coffee is horrible. (Generally speaking, coffee is horrible.)
_El café *está* horrible._ = The coffee tastes horrible.

_*Eres* muy española. = _You're very Spanish. (You're a typical Spanish woman.)
_*Estás* muy española._ = You're looking (or behaving) like a typical Spanish woman.

A _ser/estar_ constrast like the ones above could be constructed with _Los zapatos están bonitos_, but it would be just as valid in Spain as in Latin America, and it would suggest *something other than a comparison* between certain shoes and other shoes.


----------



## gothicpartner

OHSU said:


> . Quite often, the appropriate English translation of this use of _estar_ calls for something other than "is", such as "seems, appears, looks, tastes, has become, *gets*". (Butt & Benjamin, pg. 380)
> 
> _*Es* muy guapa._ = She is very attractive.
> _*Está* muy guapa._ = She is looking very attractive.
> 
> _Este niño *es* muy alto. = _This child is very tall.
> _Este niño *está* muy alto._ = This child has grown very tall.
> 
> _*Es* muy joven/viejo. _= He is very young/old.
> _*Está* muy joven/viejo. _= He is looking very young/old.
> 
> _¡Qué fuerte *eres*! = _How strong you are!
> _¡Qué fuere *estás*!_ = How strong you've become!
> 
> _Este sillón *es* ya viejo._ = This armchair is old.
> _Este sillón *está* ya viejo. =_ This armchair is getting old.
> 
> _El pollo *es* riquísimo._ = Chicken is very good. (Generally speaking, chicken is very good.)
> _El pollo *está* riquísimo. = _The chicken tastes delicious.


Excellent explanation
Thanking for posting!


Could you give some examples using "gets" (estar) vs " is" (es)?


----------



## gothicpartner

OHSU said:


> . Quite often, the appropriate English translation of this use of _estar_ calls for something other than "is", such as "seems, appears, looks, tastes, has become, *gets*". (Butt & Benjamin, pg. 380)
> 
> _*Es* muy guapa._ = She is very attractive.
> _*Está* muy guapa._ = She is looking very attractive.
> 
> _Este niño *es* muy alto. = _This child is very tall.
> _Este niño *está* muy alto._ = This child has grown very tall.
> 
> _*Es* muy joven/viejo. _= He is very young/old.
> _*Está* muy joven/viejo. _= He is looking very young/old.


Excellent explanation
Thank you for posting!


Could you give some examples using "gets" (*estar*) vs " is" (*es*)?


----------



## OHSU

gothicpartner said:


> Excellent explanation
> Thanking for posting!
> 
> 
> Could you give some examples using "gets" (estar) vs " is" (es)?


 
Thank you very much for the feedback.

I'm sorry, I should have said "is getting" rather than "gets" for translations of _estar._ Several of the examples I gave earlier could also be translated into English using "is getting".

_Este niño *es* muy alto. = _This child is very tall. 
_Este niño *está* muy alto._ = This child is getting very tall.

_¡Qué fuerte *eres*! = _How strong you are!
_¡Qué fuere *estás*!_ = You're getting so strong!

_Este sillón *es* ya viejo._ = This armchair is old.
_Este sillón *está* ya viejo. =_ This armchair is getting old.


----------



## juandiego

OHSU said:


> The situation you seem to be looking for where _estar_ can be translated as having the definition typically associated with _ser_ is explained by an interesting function of _estar_, wherein it connotes an *impression* or a *change in condition*. This seems to be the situation JuanDiego is describing. I'd bet just about anything that if we fleshed out the use of _estar_ in this sense and applied it here, he and other native speakers would agree that this is the case.
> 
> (If anyone wants me to go into what I mean by "impression or change in condition" with _estar_, just ask and I will. If nobody cares, I'll keep it to myself since it's a bit off-topic.)


Hello, OHSU.

First of all, let me congratulate you for the well explained point you've brought up here, I mean the attribute/condition dichotomy rather than the permanent/transitory one to 'label' the difference ser/estar. Personally I had not heard of it before and I think they are also fairly related.

Well, yes, I would like you elaborate on the matter of _change of condition_ since I don't fully understand what you are getting at, or better said, I don't know whether that coincides with what I have in mind.

I perceive the construction *está siendo* as pointing to a temporary state of a permanent characteristic. Obviously this contradiction can only be solved by admitting that that permanent characteristic can change. I don't know whether this is what you meant.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## OHSU

juandiego said:


> Hello, OHSU.
> 
> First of all, let me congratulate you for the well explained point you've brought up here, I mean the attribute/condition dichotomy rather than the permanent/transitory one to 'label' the difference ser/estar. Personally I had not heard of it before and I think they are also fairly related.
> 
> Well, yes, I would like you elaborate on the matter of _change of condition_ since I don't fully understand what you are getting at, or better said, I don't know whether that coincides with what I have in mind.
> 
> I perceive the construction *está siendo* as pointing to a temporary state of a permanent characteristic. Obviously this contradiction can only be solved by admitting that that permanent characteristic can change. I don't know whether this is what you meant.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


 
I elaborated on *change, impression, emotional reaction* here:



OHSU said:


> The construction _Los_ _zapatos están muy_ _bonitos_ is no more common in Latin American than in Peninsular Spanish. It *isn't technically wrong* to say _Los zapatos están bonitos_, but the circumstances in which it would be appropriate are *limited*, and they *do not include* merely suggesting a *comparison* with other shoes. This is true for BOTH Latin American Spanish AND Peninsular Spanish.
> 
> _Los zapatos son bonitos._
> _Estos zapatos son bonitos, pero los demás son feos._
> _Estos zapatos son bonitos en comparación con los demás._
> 
> There is no indication for using _estar_ in any of these.
> 
> In BOTH Latin American Spanish AND Peninsular Spanish _estar_ can be used with adjectives that typically call for _ser_ (adjectives of nature, identity, or attribute) when the speaker wants to emphasize that a *change has taken place*. _Estar_ may also be used to convey some kind of *emotional reaction* such as surprise, pleasure/displeasure, etc. _Estar_ can also be used when the speaker wants to emphasize that he is expressing his *impression* rather than making a definitive statement about the absolute nature of something. Quite often, the appropriate English translation of this use of _estar_ calls for something other than "is", such as "seems, appears, looks, tastes, has become, is getting".
> 
> (Examples taken from Butt & Benjamin [1995], pg. 380)
> 
> _*Es* muy guapa._ = She is very attractive.
> _*Está* muy guapa._ = She is looking very attractive.
> 
> _Este niño *es* muy alto. = _This child is very tall.
> _Este niño *está* muy alto._ = This child has grown very tall.
> 
> _*Es* muy joven. _= He is very young.
> _*Está* muy joven. _= He looks/is looking very young.
> 
> _¡Qué fuerte *eres*! = _How strong you are!
> _¡Qué fuere *estás*!_ = How strong you've become!
> 
> _Este sillón *es* ya viejo._ = This armchair is old.
> _Este sillón *está* ya viejo. =_ This armchair is getting old.
> 
> _El pollo *es* riquísimo._ = Chicken is very good. (Generally speaking, chicken is very good.)
> _El pollo *está* riquísimo. = _The chicken tastes delicious.
> 
> _El café *es* horrible_. = Coffee is horrible. (Generally speaking, coffee is horrible.)
> _El café *está* horrible._ = The coffee tastes horrible.
> 
> _*Eres* muy española. = _You're very Spanish. (You're a typical Spanish woman.)
> _*Estás* muy española._ = You're looking (or behaving) like a typical Spanish woman.
> 
> A _ser/estar_ constrast like the ones above could be constructed with _Los zapatos están bonitos_, but it would be just as valid in Spain as in Latin America, and it would suggest *something other than a comparison* between certain shoes and other shoes.


 
It was my suspicion that this is what you were referring to when you said that in order to say _La película está aburrida_ *you would have to be watching it at the time you made the statement*. If that were the case, then we could construct a _ser/estar_ contrast like the ones above.



> _La película *es* aburrida._ = The movie is boring.
> _La película *está* aburrida./La película *está siendo* aburrida._ = The movie is getting boring./The movie has gotten boring./The movie seems boring./The movie looks boring. (etc., etc.)


 
In this case, _está _means something other than merely "The movie is boring," where the speaker is making a statement about an *attribute of the movie*. Instead, he/she is making a statement about his/her *response to the movie, *his/her *impression of the movie*, or a *perceived change in the movie*.

I'm not sure that this is what you meant, and I apologize if I've misrepresented your point of view.

Something to remember is that there are several different guidelines for the use of _ser/estar_, and sometimes they overlap, converge, and compete with each other, depending on the precise nuances the speaker is trying to convey. When trying to settle on a "rule" we sometimes forget that the *condition/attribute* guideline can be in conflict with the *attribute/change,impression,response* guideline! With adjectives like _aburrido_, most of the time the decision between _ser/estar_ is made with the *attribute/condition* guideline. In special circumstances it is made with the *attribute/change,response,impression* guideline. If we really thought hard about it, we could probably come up with some other guideline that applies here in rare instances. (The OP's suggestion of "making a comparison" is not a guideline for distinguishing between _ser/estar_.)

We non-native speakers should never use the fact that there may be several competing guidelines as a get-out-of-jail-free card when we've made a boo-boo. If we've generated an utterance that seems awkward or contrived, we shouldn't suggest that our construction follows some other rule, possibly a collquial or regional usage, and just hope such a rule exists. (I'm not accusing anyone in particular of doing this. It's just a common response when someone is confronted with a boo-boo they've committed.) The wisest course of action for a non-native is to learn and adhere to standard usage. It's the best way to consistently produce accurate and meaningful expressions that don't require special pleading.



juandiego said:


> I perceive the construction *está siendo* as pointing to a temporary state of a permanent characteristic.


 
This is where I envy you. As a non-native speaker, I cannot claim to have an innate perception of what these things mean. I can only point to what the books say and suggest that non-natives should follow standard usage guidelines. I wish I had your intuition. When discussing Spanish grammar with a native Spanish speaker, I sometimes feel like a blind man discussing color with people who can see.  It's not quite that bad, because I've been speaking Spanish for well over half my life, and that must have given me _some_ natural sense, but I'd never claim to have genuine native intuition.

Butt & Benjamin (1995) suggest that when _estar_ is used with things that are normally permanent characteristics (normally _ser_), the focus changes from the *nature/identity of the subject* to the *impression of the observer*, and that the best English translation is usually not "is", but "seems, looks, is getting, has become" etc. I think that's a fascinating suggestion, and it agrees completely with my experience and observations, but as a non-native Spanish speaker, I don't feel it in my bones the way you do.



juandiego said:


> Obviously this contradiction can only be solved by admitting that that permanent characteristic can change.


 
EXACTLY!! I completely agree. That's why I've been saying that permanent/temporary isn't a good guideline! If something permanent can change, then it isn't permanent. And if something temporary can be expected to stay that way forever, then it isn't temporary!

So, what is a permanent attribute that can change? Strip away the inaccurate qualifiers, and this is what you get:

permanent attribute - permanent = attribute
temporary condition - temporary = condition

So, we have a contrast, not between *permanent attributes* and *temporary conditions*, but merely between *attributes* and *conditions*. Whether it happens to be permanent or temporary would be an afterthought, a byproduct of attribute/condition.



juandiego said:


> Personally I had not heard of it before and I think they are also fairly related.


 
I think permanent/temporary and attribute/condition seem related because most of us perceive attributes=permanent and conditions=temporary. This is a natural way to think, and most of us see it this way. I think this is where the permanent/temporary "rule" comes from in the first place. I think it was an "early attempt" or "first approximation" for _ser/estar_, which has survived this long, not because it is very accurate, but because it came along first. The problem, as you have suggested above, is that there are plenty of temporary attributes and plenty of permanent conditions. So what matters isn't the temporariness/permanence, but something else. What I suggest is that the "something else" is attribute/condition.


----------



## Peterdg

@OHSU

Impressive and interesting.


----------



## juandiego

Hello again, OHSU.

Many thanks for your detailed explanation.

I can't add much more basically because I agree with all you say there but to make clearer for readers the point you brought up, perhaps it's advisable to provide their definitions, interestingly both in their first acceptation:
*attribute*
*1*. A quality or characteristic inherent in or ascribed to someone or something.
*condition*
*1*. A mode or state of being: See Synonyms at _state_.

Bearing both in mind and what you said, I think I should reword the explanation I provided before for the construction *estar siendo*: it relates the temporary state of an attribute.
_La pelicula *estaba siendo* aburrida hasta la escena X, a partir de ahí *fue* (ser) entretenidísima._

Since the noun *state* has appeared in scene as synonym to _condition_, seems to me interesting to point out that its translation into Spanish *estado* and the very verb *estar* share the same root.


----------



## ChocolateLover

Muchas gracias a todos

Saludos


----------



## SãoEnrique

Muy ayudante, gracias.


----------

