"We were not students."
Translation:No fuimos estudiantes.
What's the difference between using fuimos, estábamos or éramos in cases like this?
Why not use the imperfect form in this instance? I understand this sentence to mean that "we were not students" (at one time; but could possibly be students now). Thus wouldn't the imperfect be used and not the preterite? Could anyone clarify this for me please? It would help my understanding a lot.
If you were writing a narrative and describing both setting and action, you' d probably use the imperfect (while we were not students) and use the preterite for action (JFK was shot). But in a stand alone sentence the past is usually in the preterite. We were not students (does not matter how long) but that status has ended. I can say Rip Van Winkle slept for 40 years -- preterite, over and done with. If I point out what happened while he was sleeping, the 'while he slept' would be in the imperfect.