Learn Hardcore Swedish: En vänlig kram kan ge mer styrka än tusen ord, tycker hon. - A friendly hug can give more strength than a thousand words, she thinks.

Gender and article
- kram is an en-word (common gender), so the indefinite article is en:
  - en kram = a hug
Indefinite vs definite
- en vänlig kram = a friendly hug (indefinite, any hug)
- den vänliga kramen = the friendly hug (definite, a specific hug)
  In this sentence, we’re making a general statement about hugs in general, not one specific hug, so the indefinite form is used.
Adjective ending
- For an indefinite, singular, en-word noun, the adjective has the base form: vänlig.
- vänliga is used with:
  - plural: vänliga kramar (friendly hugs)
  - definite: den vänliga kramen (the friendly hug)

So en vänlig kram is the correct combination for a friendly hug in a general statement.

What is the function of kan in kan ge? Could we just say En vänlig kram ger mer styrka…?

kan is the modal verb can. It adds the idea of possibility or potential:

En vänlig kram kan ge mer styrka…
= A friendly hug can give more strength… (it has the potential to)
En vänlig kram ger mer styrka…
= A friendly hug gives more strength… (sounds more like a general, constant fact)

Both are grammatically correct.
The version with kan is a bit softer and more natural here, because it talks about what a hug can do in certain situations, not a hard rule.

Why is it mer styrka and not starkare?

Swedish has two main ways to express “more”:

mer + noun
- mer styrka = more strength
  Use this when “more” is about quantity of a noun (often abstract or uncountable things: strength, time, love, money).
comparative adjective form
- starkare = stronger
  This modifies a person or thing, not the abstract noun:
- Hon är starkare än igår. = She is stronger than yesterday.

In the sentence, we are comparing amount of strength, not saying that the hug itself is “stronger”.
So mer styrka (more strength) is correct, rather than starkare.

Why do we use än in än tusen ord and not som tusen ord?

än and som both relate to comparisons, but they are used differently:

än = than in comparative sentences:
- mer styrka än tusen ord = more strength than a thousand words
- större än jag = bigger than me
som = as / like in equality or likeness:
- lika stark som du = as strong as you
- Hon är snäll som en ängel. = She is kind like an angel.

Here we have a clear “more … than …” comparison (mer … än …), so än is the only correct option:
mer styrka än tusen ord = more strength than a thousand words.

Why is it tusen ord and not tusentals ord or tusenar ord?

A few points about tusen:

tusen means a thousand and is normally invariable in form:
- tusen ord = a thousand words
- There is no tusenar or tusenar ord.
There is also ett tusen (literally “one thousand”), but in normal speech you usually just say tusen:
- tusen ord is much more natural than ett tusen ord.
tusentals means “thousands of”:
- tusentals ord = thousands of words (a vague large number, not exactly 1000)

In this expression, tusen ord is a fixed, idiomatic way to say a thousand words and sounds natural and concise.

Why is tycker hon at the end instead of Hon tycker att… at the beginning?

Both wordings are possible, but they have slightly different styles and emphasis.

Original sentence:
- En vänlig kram kan ge mer styrka än tusen ord, tycker hon.
  Literally: A friendly hug can give more strength than a thousand words, she thinks.
- The main statement comes first.
- tycker hon is like a tag added afterwards, indicating this is her opinion.
- This is common in written style and feels a bit reflective or narrative.
Alternative:
- Hon tycker att en vänlig kram kan ge mer styrka än tusen ord.
  = She thinks that a friendly hug can give more strength than a thousand words.
- Here hon tycker is clearly the main clause, and the opinion is framed explicitly with att (“that”).

Both are grammatically correct.
The version in your sentence simply presents the idea first and her opinion second, almost like English “..., she thinks.”

Why is the verb before the subject in tycker hon and not hon tycker?

Swedish has V2 word order in main clauses: the finite verb usually comes second in the clause.

In tycker hon, the entire phrase is functioning like a short main clause tagged on at the end:

Underlying clause: Hon tycker. → subject hon
- verb tycker
When added as a tag after another clause, Swedish often flips this to tycker hon, similar to English “..., said she.” (a bit old-fashioned in English, but normal in Swedish narrative style).

So in normal main-clause position you’d say:

Hon tycker att… (She thinks that…)

But as a sentence-final tag, the verb–subject order (tycker hon) is very natural, especially in written Swedish.

What is the difference between tycker, tror, and anser? Why use tycker here?

All three can relate to “thinking”, but they have different nuances:

tycker
- Used for opinions, feelings, personal views.
- Hon tycker att kramar är viktiga. = She thinks (feels) that hugs are important.
- Very common and informal/neutral.
tror
- Used for belief, assumption, expectation, often when you are not sure.
- Jag tror att han kommer. = I think / I believe he will come.
- More about guessing or belief than a value judgment.
anser
- More formal; used for considered, often objective-sounding opinions.
- Experten anser att detta är bäst. = The expert considers this to be best.

In your sentence, this is clearly a personal opinion about the value of a hug versus words, so tycker hon is the natural choice.

Why is there a comma before tycker hon? Is it necessary?

The comma marks a break between the main statement and the comment about whose opinion it is.

Main statement: En vänlig kram kan ge mer styrka än tusen ord
Comment / reporting tag: tycker hon

Putting a comma:

Clarifies that tycker hon is not part of the “strength vs words” clause.
Shows that tycker hon is like “she thinks” added at the end, similar to English punctuation.

Is it necessary?

In practice, native writers almost always put the comma here.
Writing it without a comma (… tusen ord tycker hon.) would look odd and be harder to read, even if a reader could still guess the meaning.

So: treat the comma as standard and recommended in this structure.

Could we use snäll instead of vänlig? What’s the difference between them?

Both snäll and vänlig relate to being “nice” or “kind”, but they’re used a bit differently:

vänlig
- Often “kind” or “friendly” in a slightly more neutral or polite way.
- Fits well in expressions like en vänlig kram, ett vänligt leende (a friendly smile).
snäll
- More “nice” or “good-hearted”, often used about people, especially children or behaviour:
- Hon är snäll. = She is nice / kind.
- Var snäll! = Be nice! / Please!

You could say En snäll kram, but it sounds less idiomatic and more like describing the person as nice rather than the character of the hug. En vänlig kram is the more natural collocation in Swedish.