"I did not follow the woman."
Translation:Yo no seguí a la mujer.
I wrote, "No la segui a la mujer." and it was marked wrong. What's wrong with it?
But in the lesson on object pronouns we HAD to put both the object pronoun and the redundant "a ella," "a él," or "a nosotros."
Only with the ambiguous pronouns like 'le' is this applicable. It is also only applicable to indirect objects.
That's not true. So called "clitic doubling" is also acceptable with direct objects. Mainly if you want to emphasize something.
Ese regalo se lo di a él. - "I gave him that gift."
That's what I don't understand. Redundancy in Spanish is often acceptable, such as, "Ella me dio el libro a mi." What's different in my translation?
Direct and indirect object work differently, plus: http://www.spanishdict.com/answers/190367/redundant-use-of-indirect-object-pronouns
That is a great explanation. The object pronoun is required if the object is a personal pronoun, but optional if it is (1)a regular noun (2)following the verb.
No le seguí a ella: ella is a personal pronoun.
A la mujer no le seguí: la mujer precedes (does not follow) the verb.
No (le) seguí a la mujer: la mujer is a regular noun and it follows the verb.
In the last case the object pronoun is optional so it does seem like "No le seguí a la mujer" should be accepted (but not "no LA seguí..." because la is a direct object, not an indirect object). At least according to that SpanishDict link that rspreng posted. Someone please correct me if my understanding is wrong.
IMO seguir is one difficult irregular verb. seguí, seguiste, siguió, seguimos, siguieron. Does seguir need the preposition because the direct object is a person? Some verbs need prepositions even when the direct objects are not animate....
I think the 'a' is needed because of it being to a person, and not because of verb used.
Is "the woman" here an indirect object? Why? I would have thought it to be a direct object...
Woman is the direct object--introduced with the mandatory "personal a" because she is a person.