Doctor's orders must or have to

[Rachel Adams]

Is "have to" used only if the speaker is not present? For example, (Doctor to patient) "It's really important to take this medicine three times a day "

Should I use "must" or "have to"? "You must/have to take this medicine three times a day."

It's from "English Grammar in Context" by Michael Vince. It's also mentioned in "Practical English Usage" by Michael Swan that if the obligation comes from someone else then "have to" is used but in modern English "must" is still used in such situations. But in the quoted example "the speaker" as Michael Vince says it's important it suggests using "must". Can both be used here as well?

 

[emsr2d2]

Is "have to" used only if the speaker is not present? Do you mean reported speech?

For example, (doctor to patient): "It's really important to take this medicine three times a day."

Should I use "must" or "have to"? "You must/have to take this medicine three times a day." Both are possible. The doctor is more likely to say this than the "really important" version.

It's from "English Grammar in Context" by Michael Vince. It's also mentioned in "Practical English Usage" by Michael Swan that if the obligation comes from someone else then "have to" is used but in modern English "must" is still used in such situations. [STRIKE]But[/STRIKE] However, in the quoted example, "the speaker" as Michael Vince says it's important it suggests using "must". Can both be used here as well? (The underlined part isn't grammatical.)

I'm not really clear which sentence is being said by the doctor and which is being said by someone else who's passing on the doctor's instruction. Having said that, that's not really relevant.

Doctor to patient: You must/have to take this medication three times a day.
Husband to wife: You must/have to take this medication three times a day.

The doctor will be giving it as medical advice - that's the dosage he recommends. The husband is probably reading the information from the bottle/packet or is simply repeating the doctor's words if he (the husband) was present at the appointment during which the doctor spoke to the wife.

 

[Tdol]

You could say that it depends on whether the doctor considers they are the authority or ascribe the authority to their profession.

 

[Rachel Adams]

I'm not really clear which sentence is being said by the doctor and which is being said by someone else who's passing on the doctor's instruction. Having said that, that's not really relevant.

Doctor to patient: You must/have to take this medication three times a day.
Husband to wife: You must/have to take this medication three times a day.

The doctor will be giving it as medical advice - that's the dosage he recommends. The husband is probably reading the information from the bottle/packet or is simply repeating the doctor's words if he (the husband) was present at the appointment during which the doctor spoke to the wife.

Michael Vince in "English Grammar in Context" explains in his examples "You must be carefull" is a speaker's personal opinion" while "You have to be careful" an outside opinion or rule" but with the first person there is little difference sometimes between "I have to go" and "I must go". But according to the book there is a difference between them when "have to" and "must" are used with "you".
Do you agree with the book's explanation that "must" with "you" means it is important for the speaker but with "have to" it is an outside rule? I didn't mean reported speech I meant examples where "You must" is used when the speaker expresses his opinion and it is the only correct answer according to the book. But you said that in my examples both are possible, so to think that "must" is used only when the speaker who thinks something is important is present, while "have to" is used when he or she is present but he or she is not expressing their personal opinion but is talking about an outside rule is wrong.

 

[5jj]

Michael Vince in "English Grammar in Context" explains in his examples "You must be carefull" is a speaker's personal opinion" while "You have to be careful" an outside opinion or rule" but with the first person there is little difference sometimes between "I have to go" and "I must go". But according to the book there is a difference between them when "have to" and "must" are used with "you".

That's how I use them. Unfortunately for the explanation, many people don't. If you do the same you will rarely be wrong, but don't be surprised if some native speakers don't.

 

[5jj]

with the first person there is little difference sometimes between "I have to go" and "I must go".

That's because "I have to go" may be considered more polite in that it suggests that the reason for the speaker's departure is beyond their control (even if it's not really).

 

[Rachel Adams]

That's how I use them. Unfortunately for the explanation, many people don't. If you do the same you will rarely be wrong, but don't be surprised if some native speakers don't.

Do you mean other native speakers may use "You have to be careful" instead of "You must be careful" when they express their personal opinion and they can also use "You must be careful" when talking about an outside rule?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

. . . Do you agree with the book's explanation that "must" with "you" means it is important for the speaker but with "have to" it is an outside rule? . . .

I do not.

In the U.S., in your examples, the two terms mean the same thing and are used the same way. But we use "have to" much more often.

When we use "must" it's usually for fixed phrases.

- "Must you" is used at the start of sentences to express annoyance: "Must you waste all your money on comic books?"

- "You/he/she/they must be" is used at the start of sentences to express astonishment at a person's condition: "They must be crazy!"

- "You/he/she/they must be" is also used to express discovery: "She must be the one who won the race last year!"​

But if we're telling someone that an action is required, we usually use "have to," not "must":

- Likely: You have to do your homework now.
- Less likely: You must do your homework now.

- Likely: You have to learn to walk before you can run
- Less likely: You must learn to walk before you can run.​

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Do you mean other native speakers may use "You have to be careful" instead of "You must be careful" when they express their personal opinion and they can also use "You must be careful" when talking about an outside rule?

No — at least not in American English. See #8.

 

[Rachel Adams]

No — at least not in American English. See #8.

Did 5jj meant it's possible in BrE? Post #5:

"Michael Vince in "English Grammar in Context" explains in his examples "You must be carefull" is a speaker's personal opinion" while "You have to be careful" an outside opinion or rule" but with the first person there is little difference sometimes between "I have to go" and "I must go". But according to the book there is a difference between them when "have to" and "must" are used with "you".

 

[Rachel Adams]

You could say that it depends on whether the doctor considers they are the authority or ascribe the authority to their profession.

Can the same be said about these examples below?
According to my book "English Grammar in Context" by Michael Vince "must" and "have to" can both be used when we talk about duties, but it does not say if in these examples either can also be used.

It says either is correct in this example: "Everyone must/have recycle as much as possible."

But in other examples 1. "You must keep this door locked." An order.

2. "You must be more careful."

3. "You must return the books on time." (Said by a librarian)

4. "Visitors must report to reception on arrival." "Must" is used because it's said by the person present. But "have to" can also be used if it's not said by the speaker present but if it's because of someone else or it is a law/rule and in this example and in #1, #2, #3 too. Is this right?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Can the same be said about these examples below?
According to my book "English Grammar in Context" by Michael Vince [COMMA] "must" and "have to" can both be used when we talk about duties,

> Yes. It's simple. That's all there is to it.

but it does not say if in these examples either can also be used.

> Of course not. There is an infinite number of possible commands.

It says either is correct in this example: "Everyone must/HAS TO recycle as much as possible."

> No. It's "has to," not "have."

But in other examples 1. "You must keep this door locked" IS AN order.

> Yes, it is. So is "You have to keep this door locked."

2. "You must be more careful."

> Yes, it is. So is "You HAVE TO be more careful."

3. "You must return the books on time," SAID a librarian.) {PUNCTUATION!)

> Yes, it is. So is "You HAVE TO return the books on time."

4. "Visitors must report to reception on arrival."

> Yes, it is. So is "You HAVE TO report to reception on arrival."

"Must" is used because it's said by the person present.

> No. Anyone can say "must."

But "have to" can also be used if it's not said by the speaker present, [COMMA]

> Anyone can say "have to," too.

but if it's because of someone else or it is a law/rule and in this example and in #1, #2, #3 too.

> I don't know where you got that idea.

Is this right?

> No. Anyone can tell you that you have to or must do something. Again, they mean the same thing.

> As Vince and we have said, in the context of stating a requirement, "must" and "have to" always mean the same thing.

The only big difference is that for "have to," all the regular conjugation rules apply.

 

[Rachel Adams]

The only big difference is that for "have to," all the regular conjugation rules apply.

Thank you so much for answering my question again. I appreciate it. The difference between them is really confusing.
I am talking about the difference he mentions "You must be carefull" is a speaker's personal opinion, while "You have to be careful" an outside opinion or rule. He says this is the difference between them. With the first person singular there is little difference sometimes between "I have to go" and "I must go". But according to the book there is a difference between them when "have to" and "must" are used with "you". It's mentioned in the pre-intermediate level of the book, but in advanced level it says both are possible. Does the author of the book mean that there is no difference between them in meaning when he says that both are possible? When he explains that "You must" means it's the speaker's personal opinion, but "You have to" is an outside rule, does Michael Vince mean that the meaning is still the same?


It is impossible to read from the screenshot. I will type out now what's written in each.

Advanced level
"In most contexts *must* or *have to* are both possible. Some speakers may use *have to* because it is longer and allows more emphasis." (He doesn't say anymore that "must" expresses a personal opinion, while "have to" is an outside rule.)

1. "You have to be more careful."

2. "Everyone has to recycle as much as possible."

Pre-intermediate level

"There is sometimes little difference between first person *I must* and *I have to*."

1. "Sorry, I really have to go now."

2. "Sorry, I really must go now."

In other contexts there is a difference.

1. "You must be more careful." Personal opinion of the speaker.

2. "We have to wear safety goggles." An outside opinion or rule.

I hope it's OK to use * in my sentences.

 

[5jj]

As I said in my earlier post: of the uses you described:

That's how I use them. Unfortunately for the explanation, many people don't. If you do the same you will rarely be wrong, but don't be surprised if some native speakers don't.

If there is no general agreement among native speakers on how they are used, then you are never going to find a concrete 'rule'.

 

[Rover_KE]

As you have asked the same question in WRForums without telling us, I'm closing this thread, which is going nowhere anyway.

If any member is desperate to add to it, any moderator can reopen it on request.