schnaz wrote:Why be sad when you can be glad?
¿Es correcto lo que sigue?
¿Porque sea triste cuando pudiera alegrarse?
I would say:¿Para qué estar triste, si se puede estar feliz?
But if you really want to keep the wording closer to what you started with, you could use:¿Porqué estar triste, si puedes estar alegre?
You can use porqué
(don't forget the accent mark) instead of para qué
, but to me para qué
sounds more natural in this context, a bit more rhetorical, like "what's the point in being sad?", which is how I understand the question's intent. Either is okay.
With feelings you use estar
, not ser
, unless you want to say that it is part of the person's personality all the time.
You should use si
here in place of cuando
. Grammatically what you're really saying is "why be sad if
you can be glad" - the use of "when" here in English is conditional not temporal, so in Spanish you translate it as si
I used the impersonal se puede
, but it's not incorrect to use the tú or Usted form if you are addressing someone.
sounds more natural to me here than alegre
. All you need is an opposite of triste
; I think the English version uses "glad" in place of "happy" just because it rhymes with "sad". Since there isn't a way to make it rhyme in Spanish, I'd just go with feliz
Learning is a treasure that follows its owner everywhere.
El aprendizaje es un tesoro que sigue a su dueño por todas partes.
Õpitu on aare, mis saadab oma omanikku kõikjal.
Lernen ist ein Schatz, der seinem Besitzer überallhin folgt.
L'apprentissage est un trésor qui suit son propriétaire partout.