Translation:Obviously he was not using soap every day.
yeah, roman2095 has a point, when 'did' is used to construct a past tense together with another verb, that verb is always used in his present form. I.e.: I did use the soap today. or for the interrogative form: Did you see that shadow? Did she catch her bus this morning? and so on :) hope I've expressed myself well
Using "would" in the non-conditional sense in the past does indeed mean that something used to be done habitually. Unfortunately when you introduce the negative form of that usage you introduce the possibility of yet another meaning which is that of refusal. So even though your translation could be considered correct it can also mean that he would refuse to use soap every day rather than just fail to use it. The actual meaning would depend on the context. Nevertheless there is some possibility of ambiguity, and for that reason you will probably see this usage of "would" less often in the negative than the positive form. It is usually easier and clearer to just use a non-ambiguous alternative such as "did not" "did not use to" when negating a habitual action in the past.
'He was obviously not using soap every day' was marked incorrect!!!! How dare DL correct this perfectly acceptable translation- 'obviously' is an adverb- it follows a verb- it's very poor style to begin a sentence with an adverb! I totally agree with you, Kotza. We're here to learn how to use Italian, not how to use English INCORRECTLY!
In English we tend not to use it very much unless referring to one specific thing (e.g. bar of soap). So, soap in general would just be "soap" (no "the") whereas the particular lemon-scented soap in the dish would be "the soap". When translating from Italian, sometimes it's clear that the meaning is either "soap in general" or "that particular bar of soap" and sometimes it's not clear and you have to guess. In a real-life situation you could ask the speaker to clarify. Hope this helps! :)
"Obviously he'd not use soap every day" is shown as a correct answer but is 'conditional' not imperfect i.e. different to 'Obviously he was not using soap every day'
'He obviously was not using soap every day' means the same as the latter yet is marked incorrect.
Sorry I know it is a very subtle distinction but that is how English is. the main point though is 'Obviously' can be placed before or after 'he' in this answer and NOT marked as incorrect whilst the 1st correct answer in DL is WRONG.
In this case, the "would" that is contracted into 'd isn't conditional, but is used to express habitual action in the past. There's a blurb towards the bottom of the page at this site: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/would