I've lost more hearts for correct answers on this lesson than any other on my whole tree. The imperfect can be translated so many different ways that it's almost impossible for Duo to include all the possibilities. Try your best not to get frustrated and be comforted by that thought that you'll be that much better at analyzing tense when this is done.
If you think this is frustrating, Latin only has two past tenses, perfect and imperfect. The imperfect can be "was walking, used to walk, kept walking, began walking, or walked". The perfect can be "have walked, did walk, and walked".
It works now and, from how I have understood these lessons, is MORE correct than "She was wearing white shoes", which I think is better translated as "Ella estaba llevando zapatos blancos" or "Ella estuvo llevando zapatos blancos".
I am finding the lack of consistency difficult at the moment, but I think I understand the meaning of the Spanish phrases, even if I can't always please the owl.
I think the Great Green Owl is trying to demonstrate to us that the past imperfect is used to recount the past or to tell stories, among other things.
I disagree. I think the past progressive (e.g. "was wearing") is the best English translation for the imperfect - when it makes sense - because it best conveys something that could still be happening/true.
The "used to ..." construction tends to (but not always) imply that something is no longer true, so it's best to reserve it for when the imperfect is used to indicate a habitual/repeated action.
This Wikipedia link explains it a bit better (the "English" section): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect#English
Your sentence translates better as "ella solía llevar zapatos blancos" but could also work here dependind on context.
Similar question. I got pinged for "She took white shoes" after just coming off the "She took/was carrying an American tomato" question, which had the same sentence structure. I'm guessing here the "used to wear/wore/was wearing" translation is solely accepted because it is most likely, however that should not make ours incorrect. "[When she used to play tennis] she took white shoes" etc. I'll report.
I also reported it just now. I was thinking that maybe she wore dress shoes for school and took her white tennis shoes for gym glass. Oops?
In most cases "llevar + an item of clothing" most commonly means that someone is wearing the item of clothing and not carrying it. However, I do think that Spanish speakers often use "llevar puesto + item of clothing" to make it crystal clear which meaning is intended.
I said "She would wear white shoes." I think that that should be accepted. English you of would to convey habitual actions in the past is translated with the imperfect in romance languages.
WHy is "she used to take white shoes" wrong? This seems better to me than wear (more literal), though I agree wear is correct (colloquial).
Using 'llevar' as 'to wear' isn't colloquial, it's correct Spanish usage.
In a previous question I got "ella llevaba la novela a mi casa", and "llevaba" translated into "was taking." Is it just depending on the context?
Yes, just context. She could be 'taking' the shoes, but more likely she is 'wearing' them.
Why not she had white shoes? It does not say "puestos" so why is the answer " she had white shoes on?