Translation:Those men will have taken the money.
The difference between "llevar" and "llevarse" is quite subtle. "Llevar" tends to be used when the destination is either mentioned or implicit, whereas "llevarse" puts more focus on the fact that something has been taken from somewhere.
If for example the money needed to be taken to the bank, and "those men" were the ones doing it, then the "se" would be dropped because within the context we know the destination.
With the "se" though, the emphasis is on the act of taking the money, and no destination is implied.
I've always thought of this as a combination of the reflexive-as-metaphorical-completion seen with "ir" (irse is the kind of "going" in which we're sure that the go-er is actually gone; llevarse is the kind of "carrying" in which we're sure that the thing being carried has really been carried to someplace else) and the true reflexive (because those doing the carrying-away have to take the thing onto their person / into their possession).
I'm trying to decide if I think that Duo should accept "gotten" here. I think probably not, because that would be much better as "obtenido" here. But "get" is at least sometimes an acceptable translation of "llevarse".
It made more sense to me to translate it as "They must have taken the money" and the reflexive makes more sense. DL accepted the answer but doesn't accept the future perfect as probability in every case in this exercise. The future perfect is also used to express probability or conjecture for something that took place in the recent past and that is the way I use it on occasion but DL seems to not be consistent in accepting it for this exercise. Some of the translations sound strange to me. Gracias antemano por la atención pero esta lección me vuelve loca.
'Se' furnishes the indirect object. Sometimes that can be thought of as <x>self, but sometimes not, and you might want to drop that interpretation.
For instance, you know that llevar can also mean "to wear", but what's going on with it being reflexive is that I'm not wearing this shirt myself, I am carrying this shirt on me, i.e., wearing it.
In the above sentence, I think the men are carrying the money and they are their own intended recipients. That is, they have taken the money, in English.
Once the meaning has shifted to include the indirect object, I think you've kind of "used up" the reflexive portion.
Firstly, this is "llevarse", which is different to "llevar" (see my explanation above).
Generally "llevar" = take (or carry or wear); and "traer" = bring - but it's not quite so simple. Spanish is much stricter in their use than in English.
Both refer to moving things from one location to another. "Traer" always refers to moving things to the speaker's location (which almost always is "bring" in English). "Llevar" refers to moving things to a place other than the speakers location (which usually is "take" in English, but sometimes we say "bring")
For example, I'm having a party and I call my friend to ask him to bring some plates...
- "Trae unos platos" (Bring some plates)
She's happy to help out, and says...
- "Voy a llevar unos platos" (I'm going to bring some plates)
Notice how in English we are using the word bring in both cases, but the Spanish being more explicit distinguishes these as traer or llevar depending on the location of the speaker.
It may sound complicated, but all you really need to know is "Am I talking about bringing something to the location I am currently in?" - Is so use "traer", in ALL other cases use "llevar".
Thank you! :) I read your explanation above (about "llevar" and "llevarse"). I assume that the word "bring" is the wrong word to use when translating the "llevarse" because "brought" implies a focus on the location.
As to your distinction between "llevar" and "traer", I'm not quite sure what you wanted to say ... you wrote that in English one would be able to say "bring" i both cases. But "bring" was the verb I used in my translation, so what was your point?
En este caso llevar significa "take". Como se mencionó anteriormente, llevar y traer pueden significar "bring" en inglés pero no en español. Por ejemplo: me traes la manzana (bring me the apple); sí, la te llevaré (I will take it to you) aunque en inglés se puede decir I will bring the apple to you. Es desde el punto de vista del interlocutor. También en este caso, el futuro puede expresar la probabilidad, conjetura, o suposición, vea aquí http://blogdeespanol.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/PROBABILIDAD-fut.pdf
Why "people" is incorrect - and "men" is correct??? To me, both are fine.
jonbriden's explanation is excellent. Maybe this link will work for you. I googled "llevarse el dinero" for examples and teaching resources. https://context.reverso.net/traduccion/espanol-ingles/llevarse+el+dinero