Regionalism plays an important role in the relationship between "stare" and "essere": in the correct use of italian they are NOT interchangeable. The permanent vs temporary situation is usually correct; even if there are different nuances in the meaning. It's not always easy, using the two verbs it's a matter of experience (but if you make a mistake your sentence is nonetheless comprehensible). Sometimes the context can help. Referring to the meaning of "being in a certain place": - Sto a casa - I stay home - Sono a casa - I'm at home in this moment Referring to people: - Sto da mia sorella - I'm staying at my sister's place Referring to objects: - la forchetta sta nel cassetto - the fork is usually in the drawer (that's its place) - la forchetta è nel casetto - the fork is in the drawer right now

molto difficile dare una risposta perchè spesso hanno significato uguali ma in generale stare = situazione temporanea oppure significa abitare sto a casa oggi perchè sono stanco sto bene con il maglione rosso sto attento quando corro in auto sto a Milano da 6 mesi essere = stato definitivo sono alto 180 cm sono sposato da 10 anni sono bravo a scuola

For sure there are regional uses, but also if you extend what you found about the difference on temporary and permanent state, to the function of the message inside the conversation. You will find that many times we use "stay" to mean that we feel like to be in a fixed or in an actual state for exemple: normally "sto a casa " means "I am not going out, I will stay" and you can use it also for the future like "domani sto a casa" (like "resto") but, "sto a casa" should means also "I am at home now (in this very moment)" (the "message" is that it doesnt' matter if I will go out after five minute, but I tell you that I am here because you want this information, maybe you want I bring you something from home... or similar, so it is not a permanent state but foundamental to the conversation. "sto a Roma" should means "I am in Rome now (but it is not my town)" or Finally "

Hi Matthew, what you say is partially correct. But as you have assumed, there are more explanations: 1) yes, geographic areas play an important role. For example in my area, in which we have a QUITE neutral accent and we are'n used to ''distorting'' actual meanings, we use more ESSERE than STARE, but I try to explain.. I think this is useful for you if you conceive ''essere'' and ''stare'' as indirect complements expressing place, and then you can link the idea of ''permanent'' or ''temporary'' status. Some examples: - sono al lavoro (complemento di stato in luogo) = I am at work now, but I will go home at (7 p.m.). - sto al lavoro = the same as ''sono al lavoro''. It is grammatically correct, but used in other areas, not in mine. * sono a casa = I am at home now, but it is possible that I will go out within an hour. ex: ''sono a casa fino alle 15.00''. In this case ''sto a casa'' could have the same meaning, furthermore that I probably won't go out at all. * sono sempre a casa = I am always at home. This could mean that I am not used to going out frequently, and this could be not a ''temporary status''. ''sto sempre a casa'' in this case has the same meaning. > sono da Laura = I am at Laura's place. (could be temporary) > sto da Laura = (probably) I LIVE at Laura's place. (permanent) But there are other examples in which, depending on the use, and the geographic area, in which they are interchangeable: sto/sono nervoso ; sto/sono assente ; questo lavoro sta/è fatto bene. In that cases, ''essere'' sounds better, but you can use ''stare'' as well. You find ''more'' STARE in the South, and ''more'' ESSERE going to the North. 2) In spoken language, ''stare'' is often used in expression referring to feelings, for example ''stare attento'', ''stare in ansia'', ''stare sulle spine''. Sentences containing orders or exhortations ''sta zitto!'' ''sta seduto!'' . And more, in way of saying ''se le cose stanno così... '' Hope it can help you Regards, Virginia