Translation:She has taken the girls to the park.
For learning purposes Duolingo wants us to use the word that most closely matches the word given.
Each word may have similar meanings, but if they were exactly the same, we wouldn't really need both words.
If we focus too much on all the possible alternative translations, we will miss out on learning the actual words Duolingo is trying to teach us.
In English we choose 'bring' when we are in the park and the movement is towards us, and we choose 'take' otherwise. "Carry" would suggest that the girls didn't walk themselves, instead, the woman was holding them in her arms or in a baby carriage as she walked. We would only use "carry" to emphasize the manner in which the children were brought or taken to the park. I am not certain about the usage of Spanish verbs (trair, llevar or any other) in that situation. Any explanation would be appreciated.
I disagree SGuthrie0. All Luis said was that is was incorrect and that traer means to bring. Dimitri says that to bring and to take are different but then uses them interchangeably in his sentence.
"She has taken the girls to the park." and "She has brought the girls to the park" has the same meaning and we understand that the girls arrived with her at the park from each sentence.
Whether you "take something to" or "bring something from", the understanding is that something was moved from one place to the other.
The actual translation is "She carried the girls to the park". Since we don't know how many girls there are, (clearly she could not have carried 10 girls to the park) we have to assume that she did not carry all of the girls so we need to translate it as she either "took" or "brought" them to the park. Both have identical outcomes and understandings.
Please let me know if you disagree and why.
Neither “bring” nor “take” implies carrying, because carrying a child means that you are either holding the child in your arms while moving, or rolling a cart or a baby carriage or driving a vehicle on/in which the child is sitting. If you are just walking with a child, then there is no carrying, but you are still bringing the child to the park from the point of view of someone who is already in the park and taking the child to the park from the point of view of someone who is ouside the park. So I wonder where the Spanish verb “llevar” stand.
I’m afraid you’ve missed my point completely. I was wondering if you would use “llevar” in the case where a woman brings/takes the child TO the park (I am not interested about FROM) by walking and holding the child’s hand. In that situation English speakers do not use the word “carry” (I’ve explained earlier why). You ignore my explanation upvoted by 26 persons and keep saying that “bring to” and “take to” “imply the method of carrying” - well, they don’t, because either verb has a broader meaning: carrying excludes walking hand in hand. The difference between “bring to” and “take to” is the direction of movement with regard to the speaker. I am not sure that the difference between “traer a” and “llevar a” is the same. Nor do I know if either of the two Spanish verbs can be used for walking hand in hand.
As some of the other replies have pointed out, bringing is indeed not the same as taking, but bringing is when an object is transferred toward the specified location and taking is when it is transferred away from the location. Colloquially, of course, the two are interchangeable and everyone understands what the sentence is trying to say. Technically, however, the correct word would be brought. The issue may be avoided if carried is used instead. DL unfortunately marks both correct answers, brought and carried, as wrong.
There are many ways to translate this Spanish sentence into English, and "llevar" can be used to mean a lot of things. In my opinion, llevar can mean "to bring" in this context even though, as Luis notes, "traer" may be the most common way to say "to bring": (ella me ha traído una cerveza). see http://www.wordreference.com/es/translation.asp?tranword=bring. I hope Luis will agree. Incidentally, I translated the sentence as you did and lost a heart. I have suggested this translation to the DL language specialists.
My question is the same as migsi's. After reading a lengthy explanation about the direct object requiring an "a" when the personal direct object is known, I came across a later Duolingo sentence that contradicted the rule for the "a" for a personal direct object. Here is the Duolingo sentence: "Ella no me ha presentado a sus padres," which means "She has not presented me (the direct object) to her parents." So if "a" is needed for a known personal direct object, why don't Hispanics say "Ella no a me ha presentado a sus padres"?
In my part of the country, when you introduce a person to another person, you present the person to the other person. The words are interchangeable synonyms. If there is a distinction between the two words, then it is too subtle for such a feeble mind as mine. The answer to BARBARAINGALLS’s question is still the same, regardless of which word you use. The comment was: So if "a" is needed for a known personal direct object, why don't Hispanics say "Ella no a me ha presentado a sus padres”?” instead of the Duolingo sentence “Ella no me ha presentado a sus padres.” I was trying to explain that the direct object in the Duolingo sentence is “sus padres” and the "personal a" was included, which is consistent with BARBARAINGALLS’s research. Regardless of whether you translate the sentence to "She has not presented..." or "She has not introduced..." - the direct object is still "the parents." I am sorry if my answer was not clear.
Same here, I really don't get this "a". Won't it then become: "She has taken at the girls to the park? Why not just: "Ella ha llevado las niñas al parque"?