# Malum quidem nullum esse sine aliquo bono



## kenny123

The phrase means "There is, to be sure, no evil without something good."
How would you change that into "there is no good without evil"?


----------



## Stoicorum_simia

_Bonum quidem nullum esse sine aliquo malo_.
But note that it's in indirect speech, that is, '[someone says] that there is no evil/good without some good/evil'. To make it direct, change _esse_ into _est_.


----------



## kenny123

< bono quidem nullum est sine malum >

Does this sentence grammatically make sense?

I'm trying to say "indeed there is no good without evil"

< sentence added to post. >


----------



## Cagey

If you want to ask about a variation on the suggested translation, you are welcome to ask in this thread. 

Please do not start a new thread.


----------



## Cagey

kenny123 said:


> < bono quidem nullum est sine malum >
> 
> Does this sentence grammatically make sense?
> 
> I'm trying to say "indeed there is no good without evil"


No, it doesn't.  In Latin, the endings of words change with their use in the sentence.  In your new sentence "good" is the subject, so should be written '_bonum_', not '_bono_'.  After _sine_, you should have '_malo_', not '_malum'._ 

Why do you want to change the word order?  What are you trying to do?


----------



## kenny123

In the original phrase, it means "there is no evil without good"
I'm trying to say "there is no good without evil"

So
"bonum quidem nullum est sine malo"
would make sense?


----------



## Stoicorum_simia

Yes. As I said earlier.


----------



## XiaoRoel

> "bonum quidem nullum est sine malo"


Correcta.


----------

