# steal / rob



## tuvir

Creo que hay varias *formas* de robar. Espero una respuesta bastante completa por algún buen forero.
Esto es maraviloso que haya gente tan entusiasta. Cada día estoy más ilusionada con este foro.


----------



## diegodbs

Se usan de manera distinta los dos verbos: I was robbed of my watch. Someone stole my watch.


----------



## James Brandon

To steal something from somebody
To rob somebody 
But - To rob a bank (=> A bank robber)

Eg 

My watch was stolen yesterday
Someone robbed me in the street 
They robbed the bank last week 
He stole my wallet 
I have been robbed


----------



## panjandrum

The verb to steal takes as object the thing that was taken from the person who was robbed.
I stole a ring from Lisa.

The verb to rob takes as object the person who owned the thing that was stolen.
I robbed Lisa of a ring.


----------



## tuvir

Thanks to everybody. *V*ery useful.


----------



## nikvin

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=63805&highlight=robbery

Hola, tuvir:

Tienen razón con lo que te han dicho los foreros, pero en Inglaterra, hay diferencias entre los términos, si los utilizas en el sentido legal, puse una explicación en el otro _hilo, arriba indicado_.


----------



## tuvir

nikvin, la página que me has enviado es fantástica. Mil gracias.


----------



## Filologuísima!!

Aunque ya te han dado varias explicaciones (y muy buenas), quiero hacer mi contribución por si puede servirle a alguien:

Si dices "to steal a car" significa "robar un coche", uséase, llevárselo enterito...
En cambio "to rob a car" sería abrirlo y robar la minicadena, cosillas que tengas dentro... Tal vez te quedes con un cristal roto, pero el coche permanece en su sitio .

Por tanto sería incorrecto decir "to steal a bank" (puesto que un edificio no te lo puedes llevar) y sí "to rob a bank".

Esto puede completar lo anterior... *¡¡*Saludos!!


----------



## aldana_mara

*W*hat's the difference between this verbs: to rob and to steal?


----------



## Dawei

rob = asaltar, for people, places, etc. 
steal = robar, for objects that you physically take.

When you *rob *a man, you *steal *his watch. 
When you *rob *a bank, you *steal *the money.


----------



## veggito72

*A*nd rob is the basic word for everything..., you can rob people, things and places..., but you can't steal people, you steal things people have.

robar cosas, personas y lugares = rob
robar cosas = steal

Someone *robbed* in my house last night
the burglar *stole* a lot of things.

*Burglarize* = entrar a un sitio a robar


----------



## Dawei

veggito72 said:


> Someone *robbed* in my house last night


 
Sí es posible "to steal people." Pero preferemos decir "kidnap" (secuestrar)


----------



## heidita

En este caso pongo de ejemplo el robo de un coche:

My car was robbed.

My car was stolen.

Las dos frases son correctas.

rob: se han llevado algo de dentro (la radio, las gafas)

steal: se han llevado el coche (!)

Como se ve, la acción del verbo steal, recae directamente sobre el objeto en cuestión.


----------



## geostan

veggito72 said:


> and rob is the basic word for everything... you can rob people, things and places... but you can't steal people, you steal things people have.
> 
> robar cosas, personas y lugares = rob
> robar cosas = steal
> 
> Someone *robbed* in my house last night
> the burglar *stole* a lot of things.
> 
> *Burglarize* = entrar a un sitio a robar



You cannot say "Someone robbed in my house..." You say either "Someone robbed my house" or "My house was robbed."

Cheers!


----------



## veggito72

geostan said:


> You cannot say "Someone robbed in my house..." You say either "Someone robbed my house" or "My house was robbed."
> 
> Cheers!



Ups!!! you must be right!
Thanks for the correction!!

I should have said:
Someone robbed *the stuff* in my house.


----------



## Sairen

> Someone robbed *the stuff* in my house.



Actually, you'd say 
"Someone stole the stuff in my house. "
and
"My house was robbed." / "Someone robbed my house."

since you rob people, places and steal things.


----------



## Conejillo

Sairen said:


> Actually, you'd say
> "Someone stole the stuff in my house. "
> and
> "My house was robbed." / "Someone robbed my house."
> 
> since you rob people, places and steal things.


 

For having something stolen from your house, in Britain you would probably say "My house was burgled!" (and in the USA you would say "My house was burglarized!" - which sounds very odd to English ears but is actually correct American English. )

Burglar ==> A thief who steals from houses/buildings (usually after dark).
Burglary ==> Theft from houses/buidlings.


----------



## elpoderoso

heidita said:


> En este caso pongo de ejemplo el robo de un coche:
> 
> My car was robbed.
> 
> My car was stolen.
> 
> Las dos frases son correctas.
> 
> rob: se han llevado algo de dentro (la radio, las gafas)
> 
> steal: se han llevado el coche (!)
> 
> Como se ve, la acción del verbo steal, recae directamente sobre el objeto en cuestión.


If you said the highlighted phrase in England I'm pretty sure people would understand that your car was stolen rather than something was taken from your car.


----------



## aldana_mara

what's the difference between rob and steal?
some people told me:  
someone robbed a car and stole $10000 (so rob is for places and steal for things? is that ok?


----------



## fianchetto

El verbo "rob" funciona como el verbo "robar" en español en el sentido de que "rob" toma una persona (o algo equivalente) como objeto indirecto, mientras que el verbo "steal" toma un objeto directo. 

Ejemplos correctos en inglés:
"He robbed the woman and stole her watch.""
"The suspected was accused of robbing a bank and stealing $1,000,000."
"The thieves robbed my wife of all her jewelry" <=> Los ladrones robaron a mi esposa todas las joyas.
"The criminals stole everything from my wife" <=> Los delincuentes robaron todo a mi esposa. 

"That man robbed my wife" implica que ese hombre robó algo a mi esposa.
"That man stole my wife" implica que ese hombre me robó la esposa a mí, es decir, ese hombre y mi esposa tuvieron una aventura y mi esposa me abandonó!

Tiene sentido?


----------



## aldana_mara

yes, thanks a lot fianchetto!
cheers!


----------



## DadaMia

Just to be clear... en inglés americano no se puede decir he robbed the car.  (It is not necessarily incorrect, but it is not really used.)  It is better to say "he broke into the car."


----------



## LaReinita

fianchetto said:


> El verbo "rob" funciona como el verbo "robar" en español en el sentido de que "rob" toma una persona (o algo equivalente) como objeto indirecto, mientras que el verbo "steal" toma un objeto directo.
> 
> Ejemplos correctos en inglés:
> "He robbed the woman and stole her watch.""
> "The suspected was accused of robbing a bank and stealing $1,000,000."
> "The thieves robbed my wife of all her jewelry" <=> Los ladrones robaron a mi esposa todas las joyas.
> "The criminals stole everything from my wife" <=> Los delincuentes robaron todo a mi esposa.
> 
> "That man robbed my wife" implica que ese hombre robó algo a mi esposa.
> "That man stole my wife" implica que ese hombre me robó la esposa a mí, es decir, ese hombre y mi esposa tuvieron una aventura y mi esposa me abandonó!
> 
> Tiene sentido?


 
¡Qué buena tu explicación!

¡Tengo que acordarte!


----------



## veggito72

LaReinita said:


> ¡Qué buena tu explicación!
> 
> ¡Tengo que acordarte!



Tengo que acordar*me*!

In Spanish we add several suffixes to express who gets what:

Tengo que acuerdar*me* = I have to remember
Tienes que acuerda*te* = You have to remember
Tienes que acuerda*te* = He/She/It has to...
Tenemos que acordar*nos* = We have to...
Tienen que acordar*se* = You/They have to...

Also the *have* part changes depending in the case... (in the case or on the case?)



fianchett said:


> "The thieves robbed my wife of all her jewelry" <=> Los ladrones robaron a mi esposa todas las joyas.
> "The criminals stole everything from my wife" <=> Los delincuentes robaron todo a mi esposa.



Los delincuentes *le* robaron todo a mi esposa.

In Spanish we usually add the article *le* for a third person singular and others for other people:

me robaron = ...stole everything from me
te robaron = ...stole everything from you
le robaron = ...stole everything from him/her/it
nos robaron = ...stole everything from us
les robaron = ...stole everything from you (plural)
les robaron = ...stole everything from them

English is simplier in that part... and therefore easier to learn! (EXCEPT in the in/on part... in Spanish is only *en*:
En la página 7 = on page #7
En la foto = in the picture
En la esquina de la calle Elm = on the corner of Elm street
En la esquina de la habitación = in the corner of the room

We can start a new topic with this  )


----------



## fianchetto

"The thieves robbed my wife of all her jewelry" <=> "Los ladrones le robaron todo a mi esposa todas las joyas."

Yo pensaba que el pronombre "le" es opcional y solamente para énfasis.  ¿Verdad?  Pero veggito72 escribe que  normalmente se lo incluye.

Entonces, considere esta oración en inglés:

"The criminals stole everything from my car" 

¿Cuál es la traducción superior?

"Los delincuentes robaron todo a mi coche"

"Los delincuentes le robaron todo a mi coche"

"Los delincuentes me robaron todas las cosas en mi coche"

Obviamente "Los delincuentes me robaron el coche" sería incorrecta, y implicaría que "The criminals stole my car."


----------



## veggito72

fianchetto said:


> "The thieves robbed my wife of all her jewelry" <=> "Los ladrones le robaron todo a mi esposa todas las joyas."
> 
> Yo pensaba que el pronombre "le" es opcional y solamente para énfasis. ¿Verdad? Pero veggito72 escribe que normalmente se lo incluye.
> 
> Entonces, considere esta oración en inglés:
> 
> "The criminals stole everything from my car"
> 
> ¿Cuál es la traducción superior?


 
I would say:
"Los delincuentes robaron todo lo que estaba en mi carro"

But remembre that Spanish is very "open" in that issue.
I live in Ecuador, and that is the way I would say it.

I like number 3 and without *me*:
"Los delincuentes robaron todas las cosas en mi coche"


----------



## COY

Hi there!

I have doubts about the translation into English the following:


*He sido robado un par de veces.*

I've been robbed a couple of times*.*

*Una vez me han robado 300 euros de mi cartera.*

I have been 300 euros stolen from mi wallet.


Thanks in advance for your help!


----------



## Eugin

Fíjate si este hilo te ayuda a disipar tus dudas.

Saludos


----------



## live2love-love2live

El primero - me parece muy bien

El segundo yo diría: I have *had* 300 euros stolen from my wallet.

Tu traducción de robar es bien.

Se dice "to rob *someone*" y "to steal *something from someone*"

Espero que ayuda


----------



## Cipriana

Someone once stole 300 euros from my wallet.


----------



## live2love-love2live

Cipriana said:


> Someone once stole 300 euros from my wallet.


 
that's more accurate than my translation


----------



## COY

Thanks a lot to everybody for your help!


----------



## judith0030

I would like to know the difference between rob and steal because I haven´t got any idea about when to use them. Thanks in advance.


----------



## rjc000

"Rob" is applied only to property, often implies the use of threatening behaviour or violence because the victim is directly involved, and is more informal, e.g.:

He robbed her - _meaning _He took something(s) directly from her illegally.
He robbed a bank - _meaning _He took money from the bank illegally.

"Steal" is more formal, and has more varied meanings:

He stole her purse - _meaning _He took her purse, but not necessarily whilst she was present.
He stole that from my essay - _meaning _He plagiarized/used my words as his own.
He stole a look at her diary - _meaning_ He looked at it secretly.

Hope that helps.


----------



## martingol

A la luz de lo que dice rjc000, "rob" equivale a "robo", y "steal" equivale a "hurto".


----------



## elirlandes

elpoderoso said:


> If you said the highlighted phrase in England I'm pretty sure people would understand that your car was stolen rather than something was taken from your car.



I do not agree. "To rob" always refers to stealing things from inside something else.
My car was robbed. They stole the stereo.


----------



## James Brandon

Isn't the basic rule (to simplify and if one looks at most occurrences of the verbs in question in everyday language):-

_To rob *someone*_ (e.g.: He was robbed at gun point yesterday.)

_To steal *something*_ (e.g.: They stole his car last week.)

Hence: _To steal something from somebody_ 

The exception would be _'to rob a *bank'*_ (e.g.: The gangsters robbed the local bank last Tuesday.)


----------



## elpoderoso

elirlandes said:


> I do not agree. "To rob" always refers to stealing things from inside something else.
> My car was robbed. They stole the stereo.


Always?
No it doesn't as I have mentioned , ''he robbed my car'' would mean the same as ''he stole my car'', ''he nicked my car'' or ''he pinched my car''.
I think you are confusing a very strict definition with the way people really speak.


----------



## James Brandon

Would you say "he robbed my car"? If it is the car itself that has been taken, I would expect "he stole my car".


----------



## elpoderoso

James Brandon said:


> Would you say "he robbed my car"? If it is the car itself that has been taken, I would expect "he stole my car".


That's exactly what I meant. Of course I'm not saying ''he stole my car'' isn't commonly used, I'm just saying that in this instance robbed has the meaning that stole has.


----------



## James Brandon

According to the Oxford Concise Dictionary, "to rob" can mean:

1 To take unlawfully from inside something/from someody

Eg He robbed the safe -> It does not mean he took the safe with him, but he took things/valuables away that were inside the safe 
Eg He robbed her of her jewels = He stole her jewels from her 

2 To deprive of what is due/normal 

Eg The noise in the street robbed me of my sleep 

3 To commit robbery ->to rob a bank

On this basis, if you say 'to rob a car', you would imply that something was taken from inside the car, but the car was still there when the owner of the vehicle returned to it (eg: the car-radio was stolen from inside the car). 

If you say 'to rob a car' and you mean the car was taken away unlawfully, you ought to say 'to steal a car'. The use of 'to rob' here, hence, would stem from some confusion around the exact meaning of 'to rob' and its use in context. So, it would be incorrect. (I know it is not fashionable, but there is still a notion that certain words are used correctly and others are not - or else, how are we going to communicate in this world? )


----------



## elpoderoso

I am aware of the dictionary definitions of _rob_ and _steal_, I am also aware that a large number of people don't speak ''dictionary English''. 

''I know it is not fashionable, but there is still a notion that certain words are used correctly and others are not - or else, how are we going to communicate in this world?  ''

Confusion can simply be avoided in your example by saying ''he robbed my car stereo'' or ''he robbed the SatNav from my car''

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rob

Misuses of a word against it's dictionary definition are not such a great barrier to understanding. I wasn't in any of my posts promoting this use of _rob._ I don't use it but I know many people who do, and I don't have any trouble understanding them.


----------



## James Brandon

OK, so you are really saying that you are mentioning the wrong use of 'to rob' in the way described in order to inform other contributors of the fact that such misuse of language exists, and can be common. Fine.

Dictionaries can be prescriptive or descriptive. In the case of French (another language I know), the approach has always been prescriptive, hence the existence of an "academy" of the French language (Académie Française) that lays down rules, etc. In the case of English, lexicographers and others have tended to adopt a descriptive approach. So, rather than people having to conform to what you call "dictionary English", I believe it is rather a case of dictionary writers reflecting, in their choice of entries, what they perceive it to be that people speak. 

Hence the general rejection among English speakers today, also in the name of political correctness, of the notion that there might be (or should be) certain forms that are correct and others that are not. Hence the collapse in standards across the board. Not to mention the hypocrisy of it all - people are (still) employed as proof-readers by newspapers, for instance, in order to correct and improve copy. If there were no standards to fall back on and refer back to, how could they do their job (which is done less and less well today)? In other words, we all pretend it does not matter any more, but we all know it does. Only the fools believe it doesn't. But I am drifting...


----------



## loveisall

Hola a todos,

Tengo el problema sobre como distinguir la diferencia entre *rob* y *steal* en espanol. He tratando de consultarlo en este foro, pero parece ningun hilo me sirve bustante. 

*rob* usually means to take something away from others by force and sometimes by threat, and the one who is robbed just be fully aware of the action that he is *being robbed*.

*steal *usually means to take something away from others in the manner that the one who is *being stolen* is not aware of it. of course, there is no force or threat in it.

But when somebody, for example, who is on a crowded bus, when a thief aproaches him and begins to put his hand into bag stealthily meaning *to steal* something. Unfortunately, *the one who is being stolen finds that he is being stolen by the thief* and tries to catch the thief. At this monent, the thief becomes angry and pulls out a knife threatenning to hurt that one, demanding all those valuable. now we say that the one who was once stolen is now *being robbed*.

Parece que solo hay una parabra *robar *que significa tanto *steal* como *rob*, pero a decir verdad, aun yo no podria estar seguro de dar las dos sentidos(*steal*:unware, without force; *rob*:aware, with force) con robar or con otras parabras.

Me podrian ayudar?


----------



## Sprachliebhaber

Your sentence "the one who is being stolen..." should be "the one who is being robbed finds that he is being robbed by the thief". His possessions are being stolen. To steal something from someone = robarle algo a alquien; to rob someone = robarle a alguien.
Briefly, you rob someone, you steal something.


----------



## SydLexia

If you 'steal' something, you take it away. If you 'rob' something, you leave the 'thing' and take 'the contents'.

You can 'rob' a bank with a gun and a ski-mask: to 'steal' a bank you need a metaphor and a pen.

You can 'steal' your friend's girlfriend but you will lose a friend: if you 'rob' your friend's girlfriend you will lose your freedom (if you don't wear your ski-mask).

The difference is nothing to do with force. If you steal someone's wallet you are 'stealing' a wallet, and 'robbing' a person; and it doesn't matter whether you use violence or not. With or without violence it is "*robar*le *la* *cartera*" (steal) and "*robarle*" (rob)

syd


----------



## loveisall

SydLexia said:


> If you 'steal' something, you take it away. If you 'rob' something, you leave the 'thing' and take 'the contents'.
> 
> You can 'rob' a bank with a gun and a ski-mask: to 'steal' a bank you need a metaphor and a pen.
> 
> You can 'steal' your friend's girlfriend but you will lose a friend: if you 'rob' your friend's girlfriend you will lose your freedom (if you don't wear your ski-mask).
> 
> The difference is nothing to do with force. If you steal someone's wallet you are 'stealing' a wallet, and 'robbing' a person; and it doesn't matter whether you use violence or not. With or without violence it is "*robar*le *la* *cartera*" (steal) and "*robarle*" (rob)
> syd



Para mi es dificil entenderlo.


----------



## James Brandon

I think you should go by the explanations given here, but also by the examples given in this Thread and in dictionaries. Even if, at first, you do not grasp 100% what the conceptual difference is, if you remember the examples, you will remember when to use "steal" and when to use "rob". Learn a few set phrases by heart, and apply that, instead of worrying about a theoretical approach to the issue - is what I would recommend.

Apart from trickier examples such as "to rob a bank", in the main, and I think other contributors will agree, you "steal *something* from somebody" and you "rob *somebody* of something".


----------



## aztlaniano

loveisall said:


> Para mi es dificil entenderlo.


 
If you take X without permission, you have _stolen_ X.
If X belongs to Y, you have _stolen_ X from Y, so you have _robbed _Y.
You have _robbed_ Y of X (as when you _rob _a bank of its money).
To _steal_ a bank, you would have to take a bank away from its owners, meaning you would have _robbed_ the owners of their bank.


----------



## James Brandon

I think that we agree that, to 'steal a bank', it could not be literal (i.e. to steal the branch of a bank, i.e. a building), since this would be impossible (you cannot move a building, lock, stock, and barrel, at any rate in this kind of context). 

It would have to be figurative, i.e. would mean that you 'stole the business' from its rightful owners. (E.g.: "His father owned a petrol station. But his partner ended up stealing it from him, on the back of some dodgy loans.")


----------



## SydLexia

rob = robar
steal = quitar por robo o por hurto

syd


----------



## Guayete05

Tengo una duda:

Si yo digo: "I was robbed of my mobile/cell phone" está implícito que hubo violencia ¿no?
Si alguien me robó el móvil/celular cuando yo estaba descuidado ¿sólo podría decir "my mobile/cell phone was stolen"/"someone stole my..."?


----------



## Guayete05

Si a una persona le roban usando violencia yo diría:

- "Anoche me atracaron / me asaltaron"(sin objeto directo)  "Last night I was robbed".
- "Anoche me robaron" (esta versión es más genérica y no se sabe si hubo violencia o no).
- "Anoche me robaron la cartera" (no se sabe si hubo violencia o si te la robaron estando despistado/a).
- "Anoche me asaltaron / atracaron y me robaron la cartera" (hubo violencia y algo fue robado).


----------



## James Brandon

I think that it is fair to say that, in many cases, "to rob" will imply a degree of violence. E.g.: A bank robber that robs a bank will, more often than not, confront staff directly and be armed, etc. 

"To steal", on the contrary, does not carry such connotations. If you steal someone's wallet, most of the time, the victim will not notice until after the event, one would have thought... 

This is because "to rob" stresses the person who is the victim of crime ("They robbed me at gun point"), whereas to steal stresses the object that is unlawfully taken ("They stole my car yesterday"). 

Having said that, it can be ambiguous. If I say: "I was robbed of my wallet in the pub yesterday," it could well be that it was done by stealth, with no violence, I would have thought...

[This doesn't help, does it?  A lot of it is down to context and usage, which is best understood through concrete examples and set phrases.]


----------



## Guayete05

Thanks, 

I think that you've left things clear enough.


----------



## Monrh

Y una pregunta más que me surgió con el verbo robar

He was arrested for stealing.....
He was arrested for robbing

What is the different between those verbs?


----------



## Tazzler

The direct object of "steal" is usually, well, an object and that of "rob" is a person.


----------



## gengo

Monrh, it's against forum rules to ask a second question in a thread.  You must open a new thread with the question words in the title.


----------



## Monrh

But in this case, which would be the best option? 

This is all sentence ... 

He was arrested for robbing or stealing , wasn't he?


----------



## alyeksa

The direct object of rob is not always a person. The thieves robbed that big house on the corner yesterday.
However the nuance between rob and steal are something that is acquired through exposure of  the language. It would be understood if they were interchanged in many but not all cases for example, I would say I was robbed if I were talking about being robbed in general and I would sat before I would say I was robbed in some cases and I would say something was stolen from me in other cases.


----------



## hedgy

Can you tell me which are correct? There should be two correct answers:
_*The criminal robbed two*
banks
old ladies
million dollars_
They look all correct to me. Maybe... I don't know!


----------



## gengo

hedgy said:


> Can you tell me which are correct? There should be two correct answers:
> _*The criminal robbed two*
> banks
> old ladies
> million dollars_
> They look all correct to me. Maybe... I don't know!



The first two are correct, not the third.  The direct object of "to steal" is what is stolen, and the indirect object of "to rob" is the victim or place from which something was taken.

The criminal robbed two banks
The criminal robbed two old ladies
The criminal stole two million dollars


----------



## Sprachliebhaber

I agree, but I think both are direct objects. (The indirect object reminds me of the story about the psychiatrist treating a keptomaniac: "but if you have a relapse, maybe you could steal me a TV".)

Carrying the discussion a step further,
The criminal robbed two banks and stole two million dollars.


----------



## aztlaniano

hedgy said:


> _*The criminal robbed two*_


No se puede decir "The criminal robbed two million dollars" porque "two million dollars" no son propietarios de nada.
Sí se puede decir "The criminal stole two old ladies", o "two banks", pero significa que raptó a dos ancianas o se llevó dos bancos, se los quitó a su(s) propietario(s).


----------



## Mackinder

"Goods get stolen. People get robbed" some forero once told me.


----------



## James Brandon

I think that, more particularly for non-native speakers, it is easiest to put forward a simple rule, which may be a bit too simple but still covers 95% of situations or so, as this Thread illustrates, and that is:-

--To rob someone (The old lady was robbed at gun point.)
--To steal something (The man stole my laptop.)
--But: To rob a bank (The gang is accused of robbing 2 banks in London in 2012.)

James


----------



## hedgy

Understood!
Para mi es imposible saberlo todo, pero ¡qué vergüenza! esto se me había pasado por alto.
Thank you everyone for your help


----------



## hedgy

Como siempre Aztlaniano... ¡tu das en el clavo!


----------



## EdisonBhola

Dawei said:


> rob = asaltar, for people, places, etc.
> steal = robar, for objects that you physically take.
> 
> When you *rob *a man, you *steal *his watch.
> When you *rob *a bank, you *steal *the money.




Aren't the words very different in nature, in that* rob *involves the use of violence and *steal* involves taking things secretly without permission?


----------



## donbeto

Not at all. Either can be violent or non-violent.


----------



## EdisonBhola

When you rob someone, that person is present. When you steal something from someone, that person is absent.

e.g. If someone stole my wallet without my knowledge, I cannot say: "Someone robbed me of my wallet." because I wasn't there when the stealing took place.

 Am I right?


----------



## Sprachliebhaber

Whether or not you were present and whether or not you were aware of the theft, it is correct to say "someone robbed me of my wallet". They robbed you and they stole your wallet.

Victims are robbed; their possessions are stolen.


----------



## aztlaniano

EdisonBhola said:


> When you rob someone, that person is present. When you steal something from someone, that person is absent.
> e.g. If someone stole my wallet without my knowledge, I cannot say: "Someone robbed me of my wallet." because I wasn't there when the stealing took place.
> Am I right?


I don't agree. I would say that "Someone stole my X" is the same as "Someone robbed me of my X".
You may want to ask this question in the English Only forum. This is Spanish-English.


----------



## James Brandon

If I am sitting at a table in a restaurant and left my wallet in the inside pocket of my jacket, which I placed on the back-rest of the chair, and someone steals my wallet (as happened to me once: never do this in a public place ), I was present, yet I can say: "Someone has stolen my wallet." I believe a bank could be "robbed" without the use of violence (e.g.: when the bank is closed to the public, and the robbers get in through a tunnel). 

I think you are introducing too many nuances in the basic meaning and use of the verbs, beyond what is justified or necessary.


----------



## nanel

So basically, to sum up what I understood from all the posts in this thread, and taking it back to translating it from English into Spanish.

To steal: you steal something - robar algo.
To rob: a) you rob someone of something - robas a alguien (y le quitas algo); or b) you rob a place, by taking its content - robas un sitio (robas el contenido de ese sitio).

Bank: No te puedes llevar el banco (que sería steal), sino que te llevas su contenido: you rob the bank.
Belongings: Si pones énfasis en lo robado: steal (you steal something; you steal a wallet). Si pones énfasis en la persona a la que roban: rob (you rob someone of something; you rob Pepito of his wallet).

¿Es así?


----------



## James Brandon

I think that is pretty much it. "To rob" is used of people being the victim of crime. "To rob" in relation to a place/ building tends to be used mostly when talking about banks, as far as I am aware, not other places, but then again, if you are going to rob a building, it would usually be a bank (as opposed to a fish-and-chip shop, say ), and you can probably find examples of other places being "robbed". If it is a house (residential property), it is "to burgle".

To recap.:-

--To steal something from somebody (the person is a thief)
--To rob someone (the person is a robber)
--To rob a bank (the person is a bank robber)
--To burgle a house or home (the person is a burglar)

For the last one, you can say "to break into (a house)", also. I believe Americans say "to burglarize" instead of "to burgle", i.e. the verb is derived from the noun, as opposed to the noun from the verb.

"To mug" (the offender is "a mugger") is to attack someone in the street in order to rob him or her; it insists on the notion of physical violence being part of the offence.


----------



## aztlaniano

nanel said:


> So basically, to sum up what I understood from all the posts in this thread, and taking it back to translating it from English into Spanish.
> To steal: you steal something - robar algo.
> To rob: a) you rob someone of something - robas a alguien (y le quitas algo); or b) you rob a place, by taking its content - robas un sitio (robas el contenido de ese sitio).
> Bank: No te puedes llevar el banco (que sería steal), sino que te llevas su contenido: you rob the bank.
> Belongings: Si pones énfasis en lo robado: steal (you steal something; you steal a wallet). Si pones énfasis en la persona a la que roban: rob (you rob someone of something; you rob Pepito of his wallet).
> ¿Es así?


Para simplificar, y aclarar que tanto personas como cosas pueden ser tanto robadas como víctimas de un robo:

to steal - llevarse a algo (o incluso a una persona) indebidamente, sin el permiso del dueño

to rob: quitarle algo/alguien a alguien/algo 

Ej

Military conscription stole our best players (from us).
Military conscription robbed our team of its best players. 
El objeto de "stole" es "players", lo que fue robado.
El objeto de "robbed" es "team", la víctima del robo.


En este caso a continuación, la traducción de "steal" sería "quitar":
Fred stole my girlfriend (from me) - Fred me quitó la novia
Y lo mismo con "rob" - Fred robbed me of my girlfriend - Fred me quitó la novia


----------



## nanel

Thanks James Brandon for adding other words that in Spanish would mean "robar" to... make it even more difficult, haha (j/k); to show there are more terms and their usage.

You're right, Aztlatiano, I did forget about stealing someone from someone else/some company or group.

Con lo fácil que es decir robar y ladrón para todo... j/k


----------



## Court Interpreter VICTOR

*steal / rob

Rob - Steal * 

You* rob* a person or                                     place.
You* steal* something                                     that does not belong to you.

*¡Recuerda!*: “*Robar*” y “*hurtar*” son términos que apuntan a _*dos delitos diferentes*_. La principal diferencia es que el robo implica el uso de la violencia o de la fuerza y el hurto, no. Así que si tienes la mala suerte de que te desaparece la cartera del bolsillo mientras paseas tranquilamente por la calle, no digas que te la han robado!


----------



## Court Interpreter VICTOR

Court Interpreter VICTOR said:


> *steal / rob
> 
> Rob - Steal -  Robar-Hurtar*
> 
> You* rob (Robar)* a person or                                     place.
> You* steal (Hurtar)* something                                     that does not belong to you.
> 
> *¡Recuerda!*: “*Robar*” y “*hurtar*” son términos que apuntan a _*dos delitos diferentes*_. La principal diferencia es que el robo implica el uso de la violencia o de la fuerza y el hurto, no. Así que si tienes la mala suerte de que te desaparece la cartera del bolsillo mientras paseas tranquilamente por la calle, no digas que te la han robado!


----------



## Sprachliebhaber

¡80 notas ya! Pero añado una más... Si te 'desaparece' la cartera (se supone por el tema del hilo que la desaparición no es simplemente una pérdida), aun sin violencia te han robado. Tú eres la víctima robada, la cartera es el botín hurtado. Y las palabras pueden ser figuradas: el pío de los pájaros puede robarte el sueño.


----------



## macame

Court Interpreter VICTOR said:


> *steal / rob
> 
> Rob - Steal *
> 
> You* rob* a person or place.
> You* steal* something that does not belong to you.
> 
> *¡Recuerda!*: “*Robar*” y “*hurtar*” son términos que apuntan a _*dos delitos diferentes*_. La principal diferencia es que el robo implica el uso de la violencia o de la fuerza y el hurto, no. Así que si tienes la mala suerte de que te desaparece la cartera del bolsillo mientras paseas tranquilamente por la calle, no digas que te la han robado!



Una cosa es la tipificación de delitos y otra lo que la gente habla en el día a día.
Hoy en día, nadie, o casi nadie, diría: "Me han hurtado la cartera", aunque haya sido sin usar la violencia.


----------

