Why must the article "el" be used before almuerzo?
Spanish frequently uses the definite article to precede a thing or concept, where in English we would translate it without.
I think that's because it's referring to a specific lunch and not the concept of lunch in general.
In Spanish, the subject is almost always defined with the definite article "el/la/los/las" unless it's a pronoun.
Not accepting "por mi amiga"? Come on, Duolingo.
Why when the lunch or the telephone is paid for we should use "fue" and when the house is paid for we should use "estar"?
Why not "la comida", as used in México, in place of "el almuerzo"?
Why not lonche?
"Lonche" is a Spanglish word used only when there are Spanish and English speaking populations living close together. "Almuerzo" is the authentic word for "lunch".
I'm guessing because Duo gave us only the word almuerzo? We haven't seen lonche anywhere in the course.
It is permisable in some cultures that a female friend might pay.
I thought "por" meant "for." I will never get the various meanings of "por" and "para"!!!!!
"por" can also mean "by means of".
This means you can use it in situations with travel such as
"I went there by train" --> "Fui allí por el tren".
Why is ser used here, when another sentence was "La casa ya está pagada"?
the pagado here is past times ,not participle, right?