No, there's a difference between "Swedish people" and "Sweden's people" in both English and Swedish.
I would still argue that with the definite article added, 'the Swedish people' is fine. At least 'the American people' is used like that a lot.
I think it would be fine if there wasn't already a translation for 'the Swedish people'. It may mean generally the same thing but it's important to look for the most accurate translation in these exercises.
Why do you need the article "The" here? Is it just because it is possessive? Wouldn't the ending of "folk" change to differentiate between "people" and "the people?"
Nouns after a possessor are generally treated as were they definite. But you can't have definite nouns after a possessor.
Correct, the possessive case does it. It's the same for other phrases, and actually works pretty much the same way in English, too:
- kattens svans = the cat's tail (without "the")
- svansen på katten = the tail of the cat (with "the")
And similarly, you could say Sweden's people, although that wouldn't be very idiomatic.
I believe "Swedes" would be "svenskar". "Sweden's" is "Sveriges". Two different things.
There's a difference in ''The Swedish people, and the swedens people'' it depends if your British or Swedish.
At least in the southern US, the English word "folk", while not exactly synonymous with the Swedish cognate, is certainly often used in the sense of people. It is not unusual to hear things such as "you folk from Alabama" in the same way one might say "you people from Alabama". And so "Swedish folk" ought to be a legitimate translation of "Sveriges folk", IMO.