# Swedish: I'm happy to see you



## mikasa_90

i would like to have these translation for these sentences in swedish:

1)i'm happy to see you

2) bye


----------



## oskhen

mikasa_90 said:


> 1)i'm happy to see you
> 
> 2) bye


 
1) Jag är glad för att träffa dej (assuming you meant 'see' as in 'meet')

2) Hej då

I'm not Swedish, but I checked around, and I'm quite sure this is correct


----------



## mikasa_90

Thank a lot


----------



## Tjahzi

Hm, the first one sounds a bit odd to me, that is, I can't imagine anyone saying/having said that, although it technically works fine. A more common way of saying it would be "Trevligt att träffa dig"/"Trevligt att träffas", both translating to "Nice to meet you."

As for most langauges, there are quite a lot of greetings, the more you can describe your situation, the more exact of an answer can I give you, but in general, the ones I mentioned above should work fine.


----------



## jonquiliser

I agree with Tjahzi's hesitation over the first sentence, though I don't think it's incorrect. Maybe more common would be to say "glad _över_ att se dig" (though when I think about it, I could well imagine myself saying "ja e så glad för å si dej!" - jag är så glad för att se dig )


----------



## oskhen

I admit I translated very directly, but I got many google-hits on the phrase "jag är glad för att", if not in that exact context. Anyway, I think the OP should benefit from assistance from someone who actually know what they are talking about.


----------



## jonquiliser

What's an OP?

Anyway, both Tjahzi and me are Swedish speakers, I suppose that's some sort of a basis for being able to say whether a phrase sounds natural or not, so I'd say we know a little what we're talking about


----------



## Banana24

Jonquiliser, I think he was referring to you when 'Oskhen' said 'someone who actually knows what they are talking about'

And Mikasa 90 - it's Thank*s* a lot - with an 's'  

Also, when talking about a 'translation' its singular, so it becomes "the translation" rather than 'these'.


----------



## oskhen

jonquiliser said:


> What's an OP?


 
Sorry, that term may only be used in some forums. It stands for 'Original Poster', I think. It's the one who opened the thread (here it means the one with the first question).


----------



## oskhen

Banana24 said:


> Jonquiliser, I think he was referring to you when 'Oskhen' said 'someone who actually knows what they are talking about'


 
That's right. I referred to Jonquiliser and Tjahzi, who are speaking Swedish properly. Sorry for whatever misunderstandings my imprecise language may cause.


----------



## Polyglota

I would say "Kul att ses", "Vad roligt att träffas" or any combination of those.


----------



## jonquiliser

Oskhen, apologies all mine, I misunderstood you entirely thinking you were referring to our hesitation..! Sorry 'bout that.


----------



## Lugubert

Polyglota said:


> I would say "Kul att ses", "Vad roligt att träffas" or any combination of those.


This is _it_. Just note that 'att' is pronounced "å", and 'Vad' "va". A variation as hinted at: 'Vad kul att ses' -> "Va kul å ses".

"Jag är glad för att träffa dej" sounds pretty much like an immigrant from East Asia I knew (no offense; I loved her).


----------



## oskhen

jonquiliser said:


> Oskhen, apologies all mine, I misunderstood you entirely thinking you were referring to our hesitation..! Sorry 'bout that.


 
No need, but then everything's okay, it seems


----------



## jonquiliser

Yup, all fine 

Lugu, if I hadn't seen a person for a very long time, I wouldn't say _kul att träffas_. I'd say "jag är så glad att se dig" (though I wouldn't express it the same way in writing. And I don't think the _för_ would be in there, after all, though it might sneak its way into there without me even noticing it). 

_Kul _I use from time to time, but it sounds very Swedish. We're more prone to say "kiva" around here. Skoj would also do fine.


----------

