You are really focusing on the wrong aspects of English.If you continue on this path I highly doubt you will ever achieve a good level of fluency. You need to stop analyzing and start speaking, reading and watching movies. This way you will see how we communicate in formal and non formal contexts.

I respectfully disagree with Kevin, if you find analysing language helpful then great! Analysis is only a problem when it completely takes over communication. Remember: communication > studying theory. The rules are meaningless unless you read, listen, speak and write to see how they're used in real life. As to your questions: stative and state are two names for the same thing, like "present continuous" and "present progressive". They can be a bit confusing: for example "think" can be both stative (I think you're great!) or dynamic (I'm thinking about going to Uzbekistan). If you want to know if a verb's stative or dynamic, just ask yourself this question: "What happened?". If you can answer it, it's dynamic. If there's no possible answer, it's stative. Try it: for each of these sentences, ask yourself "What happened?": 1. I am happy 2. John drove the car 3. He doesn't want to go 4. James put the cat outside Hopefully, you can see that for sentences 1 and 3, "What happened?" is meaningless, because nothing happened. Therefore "be" and "want" are stative verbs. And yes, that's mainly important to know because (except for "wear") stative verbs can't be used in the continuous. There are some exceptions, some stative verbs can be used continuously if it's a temporary state. For example, "You're being stupid" (different to "you are stupid", which means you are always stupid. "You're being stupid" means you are saying or doing something stupid NOW). Or "I'm living with my parents" (which means I'm only living with them NOW, later I will get my own house) Whenever studying theory it's always very important to find plenty of example sentences so you can see how the rules work in real language. I hope that helps. As for your sentence "She would live about 30km away from us", I'm afraid that with so little context it's hard to make sense of it. "would + V" is most often used in conditionals and for past habits. What exactly are you trying to express here?

I respectfully disagree with Kevin, if you find analysing language helpful then great! Analysis is only a problem when it completely takes over communication. Remember: communication > studying theory. The rules are meaningless unless you read, listen, speak and write to see how they're used in real life. As to your questions: stative and state are two names for the same thing, like "present continuous" and "present progressive". They can be a bit confusing: for example "think" can be both stative (I think you're great!) or dynamic (I'm thinking about going to Uzbekistan). If you want to know if a verb's stative or dynamic, just ask yourself this question: "What happened?". If you can answer it, it's dynamic. If there's no possible answer, it's stative. Try it: for each of these sentences, ask yourself "What happened?": 1. I am happy 2. John drove the car 3. He doesn't want to go 4. James put the cat outside Hopefully, you can see that for sentences 1 and 3, "What happened?" is meaningless, because nothing happened. Therefore "be" and "want" are stative verbs. And yes, that's mainly important to know because (except for "wear") stative verbs can't be used in the continuous. There are some exceptions, some stative verbs can be used continuously if it's a temporary state. For example, "You're being stupid" (different to "you are stupid", which means you are always stupid. "You're being stupid" means you are saying or doing something stupid NOW). Or "I'm living with my parents" (which means I'm only living with them NOW, later I will get my own house) Whenever studying theory it's always very important to find plenty of example sentences so you can see how the rules work in real language. I hope that helps. As for your sentence "She would live about 30km away from us", I'm afraid that with so little context it's hard to make sense of it. "would + V" is most often used in conditionals and for past habits. What exactly are you trying to express here?