It's like saying "anglosaxon" and grouping english, german, swedish, danish, norwegian as one single language.
It's like saying "anglosaxon" and grouping english, german, swedish, danish, norwegian as one single language.
More generally, you'll drive yourself crazy trying to form an opinion of what a language "really" is independent of what the people who use it believe. Norwegian people can generally read Danish, and Danish people can generally read Norwegian if it's written in Bokmål, but Bokmål is only one of the two equally valid ways to write Norwegian. What's going on there? You can trample over the cultural context to impose some abstract definition of what's "really" a language, or you can accept that Norwegian is a language because Norwegian speakers say so and not worry too much about the metaphysical status of Nynorsk.
At the same time it is very unlikely that the English speaker will learn Swedish, so English speakers are more of a threat to Swedish than Arabic speakers.