# Swedish: arg/ ond/ ilsken/ vred/ vredgad



## AnnieTC

<< Topic words:  arg/ ond/ ilsken/ vred/ vredgad >>

I know they all mean angry but what are the differences? Tack!


----------



## Göte

Google translate seems to have reasonable translations. "Vred" and wroth are cognates, and maybe "vredgad" and wrathful.  "ond" translates to evil. "arg" and "ilsken" are synonyms, meaning angry.


----------



## AnnieTC

I have seen sentence as:
jag är inte ond på dig längre!
but that would mean no longer angry/mad right? 

is it possible that arg is used to refer people (humans) and ilsken to animals and other stuff?


----------



## AutumnOwl

AnnieTC said:


> I have seen sentence as:
> jag är inte ond på dig längre!
> but that would mean no longer angry/mad right?


In this example: _I'm no longer mad at you._


AnnieTC said:


> is it possible that arg is used to refer people (humans) and ilsken to animals and other stuff?


It's not that simple, _arg_ can be used about animals, and _ilsken_ about humans, even if _arg_ is more likely to be used about humans and _ilsken_ about animals, viruses and so on.
_Arga katter får rivet skinn
En argsint hund
Han var röd av ilska_


----------



## merryweather

Is there a matter of register here, too? I think it is important when you learn languages to work out which words are used in formal contexts, i.e. practically only used in the written version of the language. Any examples which are frequently used with "jag" or "du" are presumably frequent in spoken Swedish.

I have read:

_jag är inte arg på dig
_
meaning "I am not angry with you"

From what I have read, _arg_ and _ond_ are pretty common in spoken Swedish. It is not really a question of whether there is any difference in _meaning_, as such, but finding out when and where these words are appropriate.


----------



## merryweather

@Autumn Owl:

Vad menar du? Är det möjligt att man skriva ordet "ilska" mer än att man säga det?

(I am a beginner in Swedish, please excuse my horrible grammar and so on).


----------



## MattiasNYC

merryweather said:


> From what I have read, _arg_ and _ond_ are pretty common in spoken Swedish. It is not really a question of whether there is any difference in _meaning_, as such, but finding out when and where these words are appropriate.



Yes, I think they're both common in both written and spoken Swedish. But there is a difference between them as *Göte* pointed out, a difference in meaning. Where "ond" can sometimes be used to mean "arg", "arg" is not used to mean what in English is "evil". Therefor, while you can use either "ond" or "arg" (the latter arguably being more common) in this context:

"jag är inte ond på dig längre!"

you would _not _use "arg" in the following:

"Hitler var en mycket ond människa." ("Hitler was a very evil person")


----------



## cocuyo

The distinction of 'ond' vs 'arg' in Swedish is more a matter of dialect than formality or essential meaning. In the southernmost landscapes, 'ond' may be preferred, while further north 'arg' is used. It is not a clear geographical distinction, but rather archaic usage in some regions.


----------



## merryweather

@MattiasNYC

Vad menar du? Är det möjligt att man skriva ordet "ilska" mer än att man säga det?

(I am a beginner in Swedish, please excuse my horrible grammar and so on, if you want to correct my questions, please do  )


----------



## merryweather

MattiasNYC said:


> Yes, I think they're both common in both written and spoken Swedish. But there is a difference between them as *Göte* pointed out, a difference in meaning. Where "ond" can sometimes be used to mean "arg", "arg" is not used to mean what in English is "evil". Therefor, while you can use either "ond" or "arg" (the latter arguably being more common) in this context:
> 
> "jag är inte ond på dig längre!"
> 
> you would _not _use "arg" in the following:
> 
> "Hitler var en mycket ond människa." ("Hitler was a very evil person")



Tack så mycket för din hjälp!


----------

