# Swedish:  beröva vs röva



## applefarm

Can you help to understand the difference between those similar verbs below:

1. att röva = Is this a juridical crime when one takes money/asset from another person?

2. att beröva = This seems to be also robbing but it is not crime?

3. att frånta = ?

Verb "att frånta" seems to be a general abstract term of taking something when the source to take from is know. Am i correct? Or is the "att frånta" = "leaving somebody without something by not giving expected thing"?

If source is not known then even more general verb is "att ta".

I understand that "att röva" means taking something that is not allowed by law, it is a crime, robbing.

I understand that "att beröva" is not criminal robbing, it is somewhat milder act.
Can you explain what is "beröva" and how it differs from "röva"?

Thanks.


----------



## applefarm

Or is it so, that both those are equal synonyms:
*frånta*, *beröva*
and both mean "to leave someone without something by not giving the thing"?
And "att röva" is a criminal robbing when one really physically takes something away from someone.
?


----------



## MattiasNYC

Well, "röva" describes an illegal act, but it isn't a legal term as far as I know. "Beröva" on the other hand is I believe used in legal language. For example if you kidnap someone you'd say the person was "frihetsberövad".

Also the synonym glossary I just checked has as a synonym to "beröva" "frånta" (or "fråntaga"), and I believe a legal entity would be more likely to use "fråntaga" than "röva".

However, I think the possible confusion is that while "röva" is a criminal act "beröva" doesn't necessarily have to be. You could possibly say that through some _legal _act, or lack of action, a person was 'robbed of their dignity': "Berövad sin värdighet." You could for example claim that a person that is an adult actor is robbed of his dignity.

Make sense?


----------



## AutumnOwl

MattiasNYC said:


> For example if you kidnap someone you'd say the person was "frihetsberövad".


A kidnapping is "olaga frihetsberövande", while "frihetsberövande" means some kind of legal procedure, be it arrested or in prison.


----------



## DerFrosch

Note that that _röva _is far, far more restricted in its use than _stjäla_. Its main use is as part of the phrasal verb _röva bort_, which means _abduct, kidnap.
_
Also, _beröva _is normally used about abstract concepts, rarely about tangible objects.

So, you would hardly say: _Han berövades sin bok_, but rather: _Han fråntogs sin bok_.


----------



## DerFrosch

applefarm said:


> I understand that "att beröva" is not criminal robbing, it is somewhat milder act.



It's not a question of mildness. In fact, it rather implies that something valueable and important  was taken from the person in question.

For example, you can say: _Hon berövades livet, _i.e., she was killed. Not a mild act at all, in other words...


----------



## applefarm

From upper posts i understood this way:

1. att röva = In everyday life this means criminal robbing, in juridical world not.

2. att beröva = In juridical world this means criminal robbing, in a real world this means "removing from someone abstract thing", like taking away freedom from someone (putting to jail).

3. att frånta = "leaving someone without an abstract thing". Like not extending someones right to enter gym (ending gym visiting contract).

Still very confusing.


----------



## DerFrosch

applefarm said:


> att röva = In everyday life this means criminal robbing, in juridical world not.



It's not used in legal contexts, that's correct. It's actually not commonly used in everyday life. Remember the phrase "_röva bort_", but apart from that this is not an important word to learn at this stage. _Röva _is more likely to be used in a historical context, particularly in lawless settings. A _rövare _describes a lawless person who robs and steals things (also a word not used about contemporary life, but you may find it in fairy tales and other kinds of fiction. Perhaps you've heard of Ronja *Rövar*dotter?)



applefarm said:


> 2. att beröva = In juridical world this means criminal robbing,



No, that's a misunderstanding. Like I said, it's practically never used about concrete objects. It may be used in legal language, but then only about abstract concepts.



applefarm said:


> in a real world this means "removing from someone abstract thing", like taking away freedom from someone (putting to jail).



Right, that's the only way it's used.


----------



## DerFrosch

applefarm said:


> 3. att frånta = "leaving someone without an abstract thing". Like not extending someones right to enter gym (ending gym visiting contract).



You may use it for abstract things, BUT also for very concrete things. See my book example above.


----------



## Ben Jamin

DerFrosch said:


> You may use it for abstract things, BUT also for very concrete things. See my book example above.


I would translate "beröva" as "deprive".


----------



## applefarm

I understand the verb "att röva", it is the ancient word "to rob", illustrated by "Ronja Rövardotter".

But the verbs "att beröva" and "att frånta" seem to be impossible to distinguish by a non-native person.

There are even more related complex words, like "att avlägsna" ("to remove"), "att ta bort/undan" (to take away).

As i understand the English "to bereave" and "to deprive" can mean that something will loose something by not a removing act but instead by a different act like stopping to give/donate sometging, like not extending right to do smth and so on.
Shorty the "to bereave" means "leaving without smth by passive act".
And seems like both "beröva" and "frånta" can mean that described "to bereave".


From "spraakbanken.gu.se/korp" database i searched example sentences.

With "fråntar" i found usage with such things:

fråntar möjligheten, rätten, medborgarskap, skyldigheter, individen ansvaret, makt, sin presidenttitel, deras identitet, sina arbetsuppgifter, sina doktorsgrader, miljöfrågorna, sina inre organ, sitt människovärde.

With "beröva":

beröva sitt rättsskydd, sina språkliga rättigheter, sin respekt, möjligheterna, relationer, förhållandet, sin egendom, sitt hemspråk, ett barn sin mamma,   honom varorna, oss chansen, en del av deras förra frihet och privilegier, styrka och stolthet.

From that seems like "beröva" and "frånta" both are equal when someone loses rights and possibilities to do something futher.

But seems impossible to distinguish by a non-native person.


----------



## DerFrosch

Yes, _beröva _and _frånta _are indeed very similar in meaning, and often interchangeable. Nevertheless, in quite a lot of cases one of the words is preferred, and I'm afraid to a large degree you simply have to learn by experience which of the words goes well with a particular phrase or word.

One subtle difference between the words is that _frånta _is more neutral in tone, whereas _beröva _has more emotional undertones, as it were. In other words, by writing _frånta_, you're not giving away your own opinion, you're merely stating a fact. _Beröva _sounds more dramatical, it implies that whatever was taken from someone was important and valuable, and often (but not necessarily) that you as a a writer find it wrong. Choosing _beröva _over _frånta _can be a way of showing your sympathy with the "victim".

This might seem at odds with what was written earlier about how _beröva _is often used in legal language. In the case of _frihetsberövande_, I suppose this can be explained by the importance of the concept of freedom in a democracy. Freedom is a human right, so if you take it from someone, that calls for "_beröva_", since it's somethings serious.


----------

