It's OK - you needn't pay for that phone call.

[Erbista]

@probus I'm aware of this regional difference but neither @Tarheel nor I have ever said that we meant only American English.

 

[5jj]

I'm sorry but I'm afraid that you are mistaken.

Tarheel, a speaker of AmE, as is clear from his personal details, was not 'mistaken'.

 

[Erbista]

Tarheel, a speaker of AmE, as is clear from is personal details, was not 'mistaken'.

There is no information in your personal details about the language you speak. Someone who has set "native language" to language A can use language B on the forum. It's even possible to forget one's native language.

 

[5jj]

This appears to the left of every post Tarheel submits:

Tarheel​

VIP Member​

Joined Jun 16, 2014
Member Type ,,,,,, Interested in Language
Native Language .American English
Home Country .....United States
Current Location .. United States

 

[emsr2d2]

There is no information in your personal details about the language you speak.

Of course there is! It's under everyone's avatar. Tarheel's quite clearly says "American English". Yours says "Polish".

Someone who has set "native language" to language A can use language B on the forum.

As a rule, the native English speakers here answer questions based on their personal variant of English.

It's even possible to forget one's native language.

Under what circumstances would that happen?

 

[tzfujimino]

I'm sorry but I'm afraid that you are mistaken. "to" is not necessary in that sentence.

"I need fill in a form" doesn't sound right to me.

Not a native speaker

 

[5jj]

"I need fill in a form" doesn't sound right to me.

It isn't, but Erbista was talking about 'I wonder if I need fill in a form.'

 

[jutfrank]

I'm sorry but I'm afraid that you are mistaken. "to" is not necessary in that sentence.

Who told you this? Did you make up that sentence yourself? If so, what makes you think it's okay to use 'need' as a modal verb in a context such as this?

As I said in my earlier post, there are few exceptions to the positive/negative rule I was helpfully offering you. If you want to continue this thread, I advise you to think about whether you're asking us about the use of English or telling us.

 

[Erbista]

This appears to the left of every post Tarheel submits:

@Tarheel​

VIP Member​

Joined Jun 16, 2014
Member Type ,,,,,, Interested in Language
Native Language .American English
Home Country .....United States
Current Location .. United States

I can see nothing about the language that they speak.

Of course there is! It's under everyone's avatar. Tarheel's quite clearly says "American English". Yours says "Polish".

This is "native language". It does say nothing about the language I speak. My native language is Polish but all my texts on this forum are in English.

Under what circumstances would that happen?

Well, if you are born in, for example, China and after 10 years you move to, for example, Mexico and have no contact with Chinese it is very likely that over time you will forget Chinese and Spanish will be the language you know best.

 

[Erbista]

Who told you this?

I guess it was Michael Swan

Did you make up that sentence yourself?

No, I didn't

what makes you think it's okay to use 'need' as a modal verb in a context such as this?

The use of "if"

 

[probus]

My wife's native language is Konkani, the language of Goa, India; but she has been in Canada using only English for almost fifty years. When we visit Goa she is tongue-tied for the first day or two, but then her fluency returns. I don't believe people ever forget their native language.

 

[jutfrank]

I guess it was Michael Swan

No, I didn't

The use of "if"

Okay, yes, I see the entry in PEU that you're looking at.

If it helps members to understand the thread better, in Michael Swan's Practical English Usage, the sentence I wonder if I need fill in a form is given as an example of modal 'need' used as part of an 'if'-structure, which is an exception that allows such modal usage in a positive sentence.

Is there still a question here in this thread?

 

[Erbista]

Is there still a question here in this thread?

The first and main question in this thread has only received a very general answer.

To go into the specifics of the modality of necessity is too deep, too complex, and beyond the scope of this thread.

But since you wrote that I don't expect anymore that anything helpful will appear in this thread.

 

[jutfrank]

I tried my best to be helpful as much as I thought was appropriate. Given your tone, I don't feel particularly motivated to try any harder. What level of explanation do you want? If you're seriously going to listen to my answer and not argue with me, I'll try to explain it to you further.

So what exactly is your question? Are you asking about differences between lexical 'need' and modal 'need'? Or about different shades of modality of modal 'need'? Are you looking for an academic answer? Or for an answer that will help you improve your English?

 

[Erbista]

So what exactly is your question?

My question is: what are the differences in meaning between the ordinary/lexical "need" and the modal "need" and "have to"?

 

[jutfrank]

My question is: what are the differences in meaning between the ordinary/lexical "need" and the modal "need" and "have to"?

Okay, I think the best place to start is with 'have to'.

The modal 'have to' can have both epistemic and deontic meanings. In it's deontic sense, it commonly expresses obligation, as you probably know. Example:

1a) I have to be at work by 8.00 tomorrow.

The speaker is saying he has an obligation to be at work. In this case, the obligation comes from his employer. I think the question now is this: Is this deontic meaning of obligation in essence just a kind of necessity? I say no, and I believe most would agree with me but I do think you could make a decent argument that there is a kind of 'need' in place here. What do you think, @Erbista? Do you think there is some kind of necessity there? After all, it would be quite natural for a speaker to use lexical verb 'need' to make what would sound like a very similar utterance:

1b) I need to be at work by 8.00 tomorrow.

Your question is (if I understand it correctly): Are 1a and 1b synonymous? I say no, they're not. However, speaking pragmatically, yes, the speaker is expressing pretty much the same thought in both cases even though there is a difference in modality.

Equally, modal 'have to' has an epistemic meaning. Example:

2a) It has to be true! There's no other explanation.

In this case, the speaker is making a logical deduction. He's saying that whatever it is is necessarily true. In other words, its positive truth value is a logical necessity. This is a clear case of a kind of necessity (logical necessity). Despite this, as with most epistemic uses of 'have to', you cannot substitute with 'need':

2b) * It needs to be true! There's no other explanation.

One more example. Imagine this utterance, which I've adapted slightly from post #1 of this thread:

3a) You have to try this recipe—it's delicious.

What's going on here? Is there a sense of obligation? Of necessity? I say no to both questions. The speaker is merely recommending or urging that her friend try the recipe. In my view, it makes very little sense to try to understand such an utterance with epistemic modality of necessity, but this is a pragmatic approach. What do you think, @Erbista? Do you think you can say that it is 'necessary' that the friend tries the recipe? Why (not)?

Can we substitute with lexical 'need'?:

3b) You need to try this recipe—it's delicious.

The answer is yes. Sentence 3b is a stronger recommendation than 3a but it's pragmatically the same thing. Does the speaker really mean that it is necessary? No, it's just a rhetorical way to strengthen the recommendation.

I'm going to stop there for now. Have I addressed at least some of what you wanted to know? I hope so. If you want me to carry on, I'm happy to, but please understand that it's not easy and takes time to explain something that is so opaque and which there is sometimes considerable disagreement on. If you do want me to carry on, I'd ask you to answer the questions I've addressed to you, so that I can get a sense of the way you understand these things. Thank you.

 

[teechar]

You might also find some of the explanation in the following link useful:

Difference Between Have To and Need To

The phrases ‘have to’ and ‘need to’ both describe situations where a certain thing must be done. While they can be sued interchangeably in some cases, they do have distinct meanings and may not be

www.differencebetween.net

 

[Tarheel]

As I recall I explained in post #2 that "You have to try this recipe -- it's delicious" is a suggestion. However, that was not considered helpful. 🫤