# Swedish:anslag



## normordm

I would like to know what's the meaning of anslag in this sentence:


> Två mil från Lenarp fanns en stor flyktingförläggning som vid flera tillfällen hade utsatts för utlänningsfientliga anslag.


The dictionaries say it means appropriation or allocation but that doesn't seem to fit here.

Tack så mycket.


----------



## MattiasNYC

My memory tells me that this is a less usual usage of the word. More often than not the usage you mention (from dictionaries) is what I've seen.

Another usage though is "attack", which fits very well of course, and that's what I assume is meant in the sentence.

Again, I'm drawing from memory regarding whether or not this usage is common. I don't think it is.


----------



## normordm

Is it just attack though? Or does it carry more meaning than that? Like what's the difference (in usage, or general feel of the word) between this meaning of anslag and attack?


----------



## Segorian

normordm said:


> Is it just attack though? Or does it carry more meaning than that? Like what's the difference (in usage, or general feel of the word) between this meaning of anslag and attack?



Given that the next sentence is:

_På nätterna hade kors brunnit på gårdsplanen, stenar hade slungats in genom fönster, husfasaden hade sprayats med slagord._​
the meaning seems clear. I guess _utlänningsfientliga anslag_ could be translated as ‘xenophobic aggressions’. I agree with Mattias that the word is not very commonly used in this meaning.


----------



## MattiasNYC

normordm said:


> Is it just attack though? Or does it carry more meaning than that? Like what's the difference (in usage, or general feel of the word) between this meaning of anslag and attack?



Well, I have a hard time answering what the difference is between "anslag" and "attack" since I never ever used "anslag" like this, and don't really recall hearing or seeing it in these contexts very often. I would have expected to see "som vid flera tillfällen hade utsatts för utlänningsfientliga _attacker_" so I'm not sure why the choice was made.  I think what Segorian wrote, 'xenophobic aggressions', could work. But I think "attacker" would just generally be more effective as well as clearer as far as writing for the general public is concerned.

The only thing I can think of is if "attack" is perhaps more 'violent' in nature and therefore maybe "anslag" is a bit more broad and would more easily also include things like burning crosses. Burning a cross by itself isn't a violent attack even if it may be the implied message, whereas throwing stones through windows definitely can be called violence. So perhaps that's the difference. I honestly don't know.

My recommendation would be to use "attack" or something similar instead.


----------



## raumar

"Anslag" is also used in Norwegian. There may be some differences between Norwegian and Swedish, but I believe "anslag" in Norwegian assumes some planning or premeditation. A random act of violence would not necessarily be an "anslag".


----------



## Den falska sköldpaddan

_Anslag _in this context is *scheme, intrigue*. It is hardly well chosen here, and few Swedes would us in a sentence like this. _Svensk ordbok_, 1986, has "plan som går ut på att förstöra eller skada", quoting the sentence "han anade intriger och försåt mot sin person och sin maktställning".


----------



## Den falska sköldpaddan

Correction:
_Svensk ordbok_, 1986, under *anslag*, has "plan som går ut på att förstöra eller skada", quoting the sentence "han anade intriger och *anslag* mot sin person och sin maktställning".


----------



## jonquiliser

The brilliant page https://svenska.se lets you search three dictionaries at once, including the historical dictionary SAOB. SAOL gives *4* intrig, sammansvärjning; although like others have pointed out, this is a most uncommon usage.


----------

