"Ella siempre hacía el almuerzo."
Translation:She always used to make lunch.
I wrote: "She was always making lunch", and that was marked incorrect, because I had omitted the article. Howewer, "She was always making the lunch" doesn't sound right to me.
In English (American, at least), we seldom say "the lunch," so your translation should be accepted. Perhaps the reverse, though, in Spanish, would sound better with the article there?
Yep. It's weird because it says these are both correct, and the second doesn't even have the article, only a different order: • She used to always make the lunch. • She always used to make lunch. ( I put "She used to always make lunch", which is supposedly wrong)
Perhaps DL doesn't like split infinitives. Very often, however, native English speakers do put "always" between "to" and "make." The reason English teachers proscribe split infinitives is because they are not syntactically logical.
You're right, we use "would" in English to reflect indefinite duration in the past- just as the imperfect tense can in Spanish.
"She would always make lunch" and "She always used to make lunch" may be almost the same in English, but they aren't the same in Spanish. Instead, Spanish tenses have different nuances of meaning.
I have written "she always had lunch" but it seems incorrect.
But "to have lunch" is accepted everywhere.
Fo example if i say "I hope you have had a good lunch" in one of the first sentences you learn in each english course.
There is a difference between the verb to have/tener and the verb to make/hacer. That's why "She always had lunch" is incorrect. "Hacía" is translated as "made," "used to make," or "was making." In other words, the Spanish preterite translates to "made," and the Spanish imperfect translates to "made, used to make, or was making."