Åsa Schoening Feb 5, 2011:

Vapenvägrare (samvetsömma) and krigsvägrare In Swedish, I would use the term "vapenvägrare" to describe someone refusing to take part in a country's compulsory military service (while the country is not at war) and I would use the term "krigsvägrare" for a refugee fleeing a war. Thus, I would use two different terms in Swedish to distinguish these categories, just as I would use two different terms in English, i.e. "conscientious objector" for the former and "war resister" for the latter. I searched the web to see if I could find any basis for this, and learned that the older term for "vapenvägrare" in the context of refusing to enlist in military service is "samvetsöm," which obviously closely echoes the English "conscientious objector." To me, that underscores a preference to use two different terms in both languages, a notion which is further demonstrated by the definitions supplied by Cynthia Coan.

Paul Lambert Feb 5, 2011:

Interesting Yes, it is interesing. A direct translation might not quite work in the context.

Åsa Schoening Feb 4, 2011:

Yes, I meant milder in the sense that the term conscientious objector is more general and therefore more diluted, as it covers more and is broader. By comparison, war resister is stronger because it is more specific, more narrow, and has stronger connotations. After all, both "war" and "resister" are strong words. Interestingly enough, and regardless of one's preference, both terms would work here because of the context. If you use conscientious objector, the context itself would define what type of objector you're defining. On the other hand, if you use war resister, the context would further emphasize the aspect of war that is already part of the term.

Paul Lambert Feb 4, 2011:

Milder or more general? Re: Asa. That did occur to me as well. I do stand by "conscientious objector" in the context, but I recognise that the term is more general. Even someone who does not flee to another country to escape service but merely refuses service falls into this category. In fact, some countries make a legal exemption from military service for people of a certain religion on the grounds of a conscientious objection.

Åsa Schoening Feb 4, 2011:

I agree with Tariq Khader that war resister would seem preferable to use in the context of refugees. Great example on the situation in Sweden: http://ijrl.oxfordjournals.org/content/2/2/265.full.pdf. Personally, I think that conscientious objector is a milder term, since the person may object to compulsory military service or to war, but is not necessarily placed at risk. The term war resister is much stronger, reinforcing the dangers of war and the refugee aspect.

Helena Grahn (asker) Feb 4, 2011:

mmm Not in this case, I think if it has a negative connotation. It has to do with a type of refugee that is embraced in Sweden because he refused to be in the war in his country.