Learn Hardcore Portuguese (Portugal): Agora o estudo já é visto como parte natural do meu dia, e isso dá‑me coragem para continuar. - Now studying is already seen as a natural part of my day, and that gives me courage to continue.

o estudo here means “study” in general, not a specific study.
Portuguese sounds more natural with the article in sentences like:
- O estudo é importante. – “Study/Studying is important.”
- A música faz parte da minha vida. – “Music is part of my life.”

Leaving out the article (Agora estudo já é visto…) would sound wrong here to a native speaker.

What is the role of já in já é visto if we already have agora (“now”)?

agora and já have different functions:

agora = now, talking about the present time, in contrast with the past.
já here = already, expressing that a change has occurred: something that was not the case before has become true.

So:

Agora o estudo já é visto…
Literally: “Now study is already seen…”
Implies: in the past it wasn’t seen that way, but now it is.

Without já, you lose that “change over time” nuance:

Agora o estudo é visto… = “Now study is seen…”, less emphasis on “already / by now”.

What exactly is é visto grammatically? Is that like a passive?

Yes, é visto is the passive voice:

é – 3rd person singular of ser (to be) in the present.
visto – past participle of ver (to see).

Together: é visto = “is seen”.

Underlying active idea would be something like:

(As pessoas) vêem o estudo como parte natural do meu dia.
→ (People) see study as a natural part of my day.

Passive:

O estudo já é visto como parte natural do meu dia.
→ “Study is (already) seen as a natural part of my day.”

Why is it visto and not something like vista in é visto?

In the passive voice, the past participle agrees in gender and number with the subject:

Subject: o estudo (masculine, singular)
Past participle of ver:
- masculine singular: visto
- feminine singular: vista
- masculine plural: vistos
- feminine plural: vistas

So:

O estudo é visto. (masc. sing.)
A matéria é vista. (fem. sing.)
Os estudos são vistos. (masc. pl.)
As matérias são vistas. (fem. pl.)

Here o estudo is masculine singular, so visto is correct.

What does como mean in visto como parte natural do meu dia? Is it “like” or “as”?

Here como means “as” (in the sense of “in the role/character of”), not “how”:

é visto como parte natural do meu dia
= “is seen as a natural part of my day”

More examples with this meaning:

Vejo‑te como um amigo. – “I see you as a friend.”
Ele é respeitado como líder. – “He is respected as a leader.”

Why is it parte natural do meu dia and not da meu dia or something else?

Two points here:

do = de + o, not da
- dia is masculine: o dia.
- de + o dia → do dia
  If it were feminine, you’d have da (de + a):
- da noite = “of the night”
Why de (“of”) at all?
- parte de X = “part of X”
  So parte natural do meu dia = “a natural part of my day”.

Word‑for‑word:

parte natural – “natural part”
do meu dia – “of my day”

Why is the pronoun written as dá‑me with a hyphen, and not me dá?

This is a key difference between European Portuguese (EP) and Brazilian Portuguese (BP):

In European Portuguese, in normal affirmative sentences the unstressed object pronoun usually comes after the verb, joined with a hyphen (enclisis):
- dá‑me coragem – “gives me courage”
- disse‑me – “told me”
- mostrou‑nos – “showed us”
In Brazilian Portuguese, it’s much more common to put it before the verb (proclisis):
- me dá coragem
- me disse
- nos mostrou

Since you specified Portuguese from Portugal, dá‑me is the standard and natural form here.

Why is it isso dá‑me coragem and not isto dá‑me coragem?

Both isto and isso mean roughly “this/that”, but they differ in reference:

isto – “this”, usually something very close to the speaker, or something the speaker is about to introduce.
isso – “that”, usually something that has just been mentioned or is more “neutral / not right here”.

In this sentence:

“That (situation just described) gives me courage to continue.”

The speaker is referring back to the whole previous idea (Agora o estudo já é visto como parte natural do meu dia). For that, isso is natural.

Using isto here would sound odd, unless the speaker were somehow treating it as something they’re just now presenting or pointing to in a very “immediate” way.

Why is coragem used without an article? Why not a coragem?

coragem is an abstract, uncountable noun, like “courage” in English.

dá‑me coragem – “gives me courage” (some courage, courage in general)
Using a coragem would mean “the courage”, a bit more specific/definite.

So:

Isso dá‑me coragem para continuar.
= “That gives me courage to continue.” (neutral, natural)
Isso dá‑me a coragem para continuar.
Possible, but it suggests some more specific or previously mentioned courage; it’s not the usual, neutral choice here.

Portuguese is flexible with articles for abstract nouns; adding or omitting the article often adds a subtle nuance of specificity or generality.

Why is it coragem para continuar and not something like coragem de continuar?

With coragem, the most natural preposition before a verb expressing what you have courage to do is para:

coragem para continuar – “courage to continue”
coragem para falar em público – “courage to speak in public”
coragem para mudar de vida – “courage to change (one’s) life”

de can appear with coragem in other structures:

falta‑me coragem de falar com ele – also heard, but coragem para falar is more neutral and common.
In many contexts, para sounds more idiomatic when you’re talking about the purpose or goal of that courage.

Why is it just continuar at the end, without saying continuar a estudar or continuar a fazer isso?

Portuguese often omits information that is clear from context, just like English:

English: “That gives me courage to continue.” (we silently understand “continue studying / doing this”.)
Portuguese: Isso dá‑me coragem para continuar.

You could be more explicit:

…coragem para continuar a estudar.
…coragem para continuar com isto.

But it isn’t necessary; the verb continuar naturally refers back to the ongoing activity already mentioned: o estudo.

Why is it é visto with ser and not está visto with estar?

In the passive voice, ser + past participle usually describes a state that is more general or characteristic, while estar + past participle can feel more temporary or result‑focused.

Here, the idea is:

Study is regarded / is considered as a natural part of my day now (a more stable new reality or “status”).

So:

O estudo já é visto como parte natural do meu dia.
= “Study is already seen as a natural part of my day.”

Está visto in this meaning would be odd. Está visto is used more in expressions like:

Está visto que… – “It’s obvious that…”
Está visto e aprovado. – “It is (now) seen and approved.” (result state of some process)

Why is there a comma before e in …, e isso dá‑me coragem…? In English we don’t always put a comma before “and”.

Portuguese comma rules are stricter than English ones. Here we have two independent clauses, each with its own subject and verb:

Agora o estudo já é visto como parte natural do meu dia
isso dá‑me coragem para continuar

When joining two full clauses with e, Portuguese often does use a comma, especially if the clauses are a bit long or there is a clear logical step from one to the other.

So:

Agora o estudo já é visto como parte natural do meu dia, e isso dá‑me coragem para continuar.

Leaving out the comma wouldn’t be a serious mistake in casual writing, but the comma is very natural and common here.

Could we say me dá coragem instead of dá‑me coragem in Portugal?

In informal spoken European Portuguese, people do sometimes say me dá, influenced by Brazilian Portuguese or by casual speech patterns.

However:

In standard European Portuguese, especially in writing, dá‑me coragem is the correct and expected form.
Using me dá coragem in writing will be seen as Brazilian or as non‑standard in Portugal.

So for European Portuguese:

Prefer dá‑me coragem in almost all written contexts.