Translation:That pair of yellow shoes is mine.
Either is okay. If you use "is", you're making the verb accord with the word "pair" itself. If you use "are", you're using what's called "synesis" or "notional agreement", and making it accord with the plural notion introduced by "pair" and in this case sustained by the plural "shoes".
Both are common and acceptable in English, though there are regional differences in the relative amounts of usage, and nuance may be a factor in the decision of whether to use the singular or the plural verb, as suggested here:
I thought the verb was conjugated according to "pair" which is a singular collective noun (the plural being "pairs") and the phrase "of shoes" is describing "pair. " In practice, both are used often enough to be correct, and there is variance between British, American, Canadian, etc. versions of English. For reference, I'm American.
Given that "這雙……鞋子" is being accepted as "these… shoes" in at least two other exercises, "those… shoes" should be accepted here for consistency.
(At least one those two exercises would only accept "these shoes"; "this pair of shoes" was not allowed; here we have the opposite case: "that pair of yellow shoes" is required and "those yellow shoes" is prohibited.)
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh. I'm never going to test out of this module. Fifth time round now and i keep getting caught out by things like some questions requiring a pair of shoes and others rejecting it. This is the worst beta test ever. How can it still be this broken after over a year?
Someone wrote this a year ago, 'It should read "That pair of yellow shoes are mine." Pair is a measure word, similar to 双, pair as in two, as in more than one. So you need a multiple conjunction of the verb "be" which is are.' I don't think duolingo accepted it because it's not proper English, but it is used both ways. Most English speakers would say 'That pair of yellow shoes are mine'. Duolingo needs to provide some flexibility here.
Sometimes, you get it wrong for translating 一双 as "a pair", sometimes it's for omitting that part in the translation. It's becoming an ordeal to complete each lesson in less than 30 minutes because our correct answers don't match the bank of sentences already available in the course. Crowd-sourcing shouldn't be used to build the whole course but to improve an already existent or near exhaustive database. Why the hell do you release in beta courses which aren't user friendly in the slightest? Wouldn't it be better to wait before releasing them? I'm this close to give up and ask for a refund of my subscription for Pro. This was really a waste of time and money altogether. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only user feeling this way.
Well, RajasDaithankar, now that you're openly concerned about the English and not just the Chinese, contrary to your several earlier complaints on various discussion pages in this Chinese course, you could at least try to read around to confirm what knowledge you think you have about it, and in this particular case you could learn about notional agreement. I've provided enough links to get you started.
@PeaceJoyPancakes - Thanks a lot for your links. Greatly appreciated. I found this instructive from your links "If the usage primarily deals with the pair as a unit, go for the singular". Shoes are in a pair as a unit - always. You don't buy or wear just the right shoe or just the left shoe. Hence "This pair is mine". And yes, I'm still very much in favour of focusing on the Chinese. But I find it amusing how much time people spend here on English. Thankfully I do that only occasionally, compared to a few others. That too, mostly to defend the Duo provided translations so that people start taking them as-they-are and moving on with the Chinese. My 2 cents.
A pair is always both a unit and a collection of two individual things by definition, which is exactly the sort of thing that notional agreement or synesis is about.
As for shoes, I own a pair that have been separated. (Note the plural verb.) One is in the trunk of the car in the parking lot behind my building, and the other in my parents' entryway a few hundred miles away.
You can cherry-pick a single sentence from one non-expert commentator's (albeit reasonable) advice and apply a specious restriction of your own, or you can recognize the overall theme of the references, expert and non-expert alike: that both usages are possible, depending on how one conceives of the thing(s) in question, and according to personal and regional preferences. Asserting your own preference is fine, but call it what it is. I note, also, the immediately preceding sentence in the passage you quoted from, which you ignored: "The most sensible way to approach this one is to assume both forms are valid."
And instead of "defending" Duo, why not stand up for language? Not only will that support Duo's project in a larger sense, but in this particular case, there's plenty of room for both grammatically acceptable usages.
Okay I will be sensible and assume both forms are valid. A pair of shoes go a long way. :-) And that pair of yellow shoes are mine. :-) I will henceforth follow your advice though many of your links suggest "What Should You Do? If a pair seems like one thing, it’s singular. If a pair seems like two separate things, it’s plural." But best thing is to assume either singular or plural are fine. Done. On to greater things.
Quoting selectively and (still) avoiding the overall point, which was my obvious but obviously misconstrued point.
You're welcome, but it's not just English, it's Chinese too. I like to apply my effort to language in general, and to both languages in a pair when translation between them is involved.
I'm not feeling, I'm observing. You took one sentence, not "points", and left out the immediately preceding sentence, "The most sensible way to approach this one is to assume both forms are valid."
Which is essentially what each of those "multiple links" says, if you care to read them. If you read the Oxford entry, you'll see that even in the sense of "two parts joined together", such as with "a pair of pants", which are even more a "unit" than a pair of shoes in your proposed conception of them, the entry says that a plural verb is sometimes used.
I agree that we disagree, without even having to agree to do so. With that, moving on.
@KaiCheong - your name are very good. Hence "are" should be accepted. If your name is very good then "is" should be accepted.
A pair is singular just like name. If the argument is that a pair of shoes has two shoes, then so does your name have two parts - first name and last name.
So decide, whether your name are good or your name is good?
In response to several comments. I am a native english speaker. Correct is "Those are my yellow shoes" or "Those yellow shoes are mine" or "That is my pair of yellow shoes" or "That pair of yellow shoes is mine". Therefore, two shoes us plural and one pair of shoes is singular.
Notional agreement is acceptable in relation to "pair", and it can be a matter of nuance or of regional usage, so a plural verb for your last sentence ("that pair ... are") can't be ruled out.
(I'm also a native English speaker.)
"Boot(s)" is "靴子" ("xuēzi"). And "sock(s)", another term for something worn on the feet, is "袜子" ("wàzi").
It's possible that the term "鞋子" can include boots and other similar things worn on the feet, but then the equivalent in English is something like "footwear". However, generally "鞋子" is translated as "shoe(s)".
If you do a Google image search of each of the two Chinese terms "鞋子" and "靴子", you'll see a clear difference being maintained.