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

[Erbista]

What are the differences in meaning between verbs 'need', 'need to' and 'have to'? I know the grammar differences but have doubts about the meanings.

Consider these sentences
1. It's OK - you needn't pay for that phone call.
2. Need I come in tomorrow?
3. In my job I have to work from nine to five
4. You've got to try this recipe—it's delicious.
5. There’s the doorbell. It has to be George
6. Do you have to hum so loudly?
7. All you need to do is complete this form.
8. You needn't bother asking Rick — I know he's too busy.
9. You don't need to pay for emergency calls in most countries.

It's possible to create their analogous versions with 'need', 'need to' and 'have to' (with one exception: for grammatical reasons, 'need' alone don't work in affirmative sentences)

Would 'need', 'need to' and 'have to' have the same meaning in each sentence?

 

[Tarheel]

I think you mean "Do they have the same meaning in each sentence?"

1. I think "needn't" works in British English. I would say: "You don't have to pay for that phone call."
2. I would say: "Do I have to come in tomorrow?"
3. That's okay, but it doesn't seem very natural. "I have a nine to five job" or "I work from 9-5" are both, I think, more natural.
4. "You've got to" in this one is a suggestion.
5. "It has to be" doesn't in this case mean it's required. It means that's who the speaker expects.
6. "Do you have to" doesn't mean "Are you required to". The speaker is expressing mild annoyance.
7. The speaker is stating a requirement.
8. "You needn't" in effect means "Don't". In other words, "Don't bother asking Rick. He's busy."
9. "You don't need to" - "It's not required".

 

[jutfrank]

First of all, can you please tell us where you got these sentences from?

Secondly, could you clarify your question? Are you asking which sentences express necessity? Are you asking whether 'have to' can express necessity? Or are you asking about different kinds of necessity? It really isn't clear.

 

[Erbista]

These sentences come from the book 'practical english grammar' and oxford learner's dictionary

As I wrote earlier I'm asking what is the difference in meaning between 'need', 'need to' and 'have to'. If there is no difference in meaning between them then I should be able to use both 'need' and 'need to' as well as 'have to' in each of these 9 sentences.

(The exception is the grammatical rule that you can't use 'need' + verb in affirmative sentences so some of these sentences can't be constructed with 'need' alone)

 

[Erbista]

I think you mean "Do they have the same meaning in each sentence?"

1. I think "needn't" works in British English. I would say: "You don't have to pay for that phone call."
2. I would say: "Do I have to come in tomorrow?"
3. That's okay, but it doesn't seem very natural. "I have a nine to five job" or "I work from 9-5" are both, I think, more natural.
4. "You've got to" in this one is a suggestion.
5. "It has to be" doesn't in this case mean it's required. It means that's who the speaker expects.
6. "Do you have to" doesn't mean "Are you required to". The speaker is expressing mild annoyance.
7. The speaker is stating a requirement.
8. "You needn't" in effect means "Don't". In other words, "Don't bother asking Rick. He's busy."
9. "You don't need to" - "It's not required".

Thanks for that but I'm not asking for your personal preference of sentence choice or your personal sense of naturalness.

As I wrote earlier my question is: what are the differences in meaning between 'need', 'need to' and 'have to'.

In other words:

1. It's OK - you needn't pay for that phone call.
What if I say "you don't need to pay ..." or "you don't have to pay ..."? Is there any difference in meaning?

3. In my job I have to work from nine to five
What if I say 'In my job I need to work ..." or 'I wonder if in my job I need work ..."? Is there any difference in meaning?

(I added 'I wonder if' because normally 'need' + verb would be impossible in affirmative sentences)

 

[Tarheel]

@Erbista You were supposed to pay attention. Apparently, you haven't done that.

1. "You don't need to pay" and "You don't have to pay" are the same there.
3. Well, you already said you're not interested in my opinion. However, you can regard "have to" as expressing a sense of obligation. I would give you my opinion on the speaker meaning of that particular sentence, but you told me not to.

 

[teechar]

Hello Erbista, and welcome to the forum.
Note that "have to" is stronger than "need (to)". Does that general comment help you?

 

[emsr2d2]

These sentences come from the books 'Practical English Grammar' and 'Oxford Learner's Dictionary'.

Remember to capitalise titles (books, films, TV shows etc) correctly.

 

[5jj]

... and also give the name of the author of any book or article that has a named author.

 

[5jj]

Would 'need', 'need to' and 'have to' have the same meaning in each sentence?

The short anwer is 'No'.

Need (modal) and need (lexical) never have exactly the same shades of meaning; These two and have to often mean clearly different things. One thread to discuss all nine of your examples would become hopelessly complicated. I suggest you start a new thread with at most three of your sentences. When you are happy with the responsess you receive, start another thread with another three sentences.

 

[jutfrank]

You should start off by making this very basic distinction:

The verb need, whether auxiliary or lexical always expresses necessity of some kind, as does the noun.
The modal have to may express necessity, but it may express a different modal meaning.

As 5jj has told you, for further analysis, let's take just two or three of your examples at at time. We can't deal with nine.

 

[Erbista]

You actually don't have to deal with any of these. I have only one question: What are the differences in meaning between verbs 'need', 'need to' and 'have to'?

The examples are just examples. They are not necessary

 

[Erbista]

Hello Erbista, and welcome to the forum.
Note that "have to" is stronger than "need (to)". Does that general comment help you?

Yes but this does not exhaust the subject. This could be the first sentence in a longer statement.

 

[jutfrank]

I have only one question: What are the differences in meaning between verbs 'need', 'need to' and 'have to'?

First of all, 'need to' is not a verb. The verb is 'need', and it can work in three ways:

1) As a lexical verb, followed by a to-infinitive verb form. The sense is necessity.
2) As an auxiliary, followed by 'not'. The sense is modal necessity. (More specifically 'zero necessity'.)
3) As an auxiliary forming an interrogative. The sense is, again, necessity.

So to summarise, the verb 'need', whether used as an auxiliary or a lexical verb, always has a sense of necessity of some kind.

The chunk 'have to' is best understood as having a range of modal meaning, only one sense of which is necessity.

 

[Erbista]

First of all, 'need to' is not a verb.

Yes, that's true. I used this form to make it clear that I refer to 'need' as an ordinary verb but technically the verb is 'need'

it can work in three ways:

1) As a lexical verb, followed by a to-infinitive verb form. The sense is necessity.
2) As an auxiliary, followed by 'not'. The sense is modal necessity. (More specifically 'zero necessity'.)
3) As an auxiliary forming an interrogative. The sense is, again, necessity

I would say that as a verb 'need' can work in two ways:
- as an ordinary verb
- as a modal verb
You mentioned questions and negations but note that affirmative sentences are also possible: 'I wonder if I need to fill in a form.'

So to summarise, the verb 'need', whether used as an auxiliary or a lexical verb, always has a sense of necessity of some kind.

So do you think that there is no difference in meaning between ordinary 'need' and modal 'need'?
If so, then Practical English Usage doesn't agree: 'These modal forms of need normally refer to immediate necessity.', 'They are not used to talk about habitual, general necessity.'
If not, could you be more specific? The statement that 'need' always refers to some kind of 'necessity' is a very general answer to the question 'what are the differences in meaning between ordinary 'need' and modal 'need'.

 

[jutfrank]

I would say that as a verb 'need' can work in two ways:
- as an ordinary verb
- as a modal verb

You mean a lexical verb (what you call 'ordinary') and an modal auxiliary verb. But no, as I said, it's better to think of there being three ways. Here's why: When you use auxiliary 'need' in the interrogative, it is nearly always positive, not negative:

Need I come in tomorrow?
*Need not I come in tomorrow?

And when you use auxiliary 'need' in the declarative, it is nearly always negative, not positive:

You needn't bother asking Rick.
*You need bother asking Rick.

This positivity/negativity also affects meaning, which is another reason to separate auxiliary need into two distinct uses. Exceptions to these rules are rare.

You mentioned questions and negations but note that affirmative sentences are also possible: 'I wonder if I need to fill in a form.'

No. That's lexical 'need', not auxiliary 'need'. Lexical 'need' follows with a to-infinitive complement, whether in a declarative or interrogative sentence.

So do you think that there is no difference in meaning between ordinary 'need' and modal 'need'?

No, I think there are differences.

If so, then Practical English Usage doesn't agree: 'These modal forms of need normally refer to immediate necessity.', 'They are not used to talk about habitual, general necessity.'

Are you asking me to comment on this? Yes, I think Swan's distinction between immediate and habitual necessity is decent, and works well as a practical guide for learners. For someone who studies modality, however, things are not quite so simple.

The statement that 'need' always refers to some kind of 'necessity' is a very general answer to the question 'what are the differences in meaning between ordinary 'need' and modal 'need'.

Yes, I gave a very general answer for a good reason: I was attempting to answer directly what was a very general and confused question. To go into the specifics of the modality of necessity is too deep, too complex, and beyond the scope of this thread. For the moment, and for a learner at your level, use Swan's simple distinction. Do you feel you understand this distinction between immediate and general/habitual necessity?

 

[Erbista]

No. That's lexical 'need', not auxiliary 'need'. Lexical 'need' follows with a to-infinitive complement, whether in a declarative or interrogative sentence.

I'm sorry. I meant 'I wonder if I need fill in a form.'

Do you feel you understand this distinction between immediate and general/habitual necessity?

Yes, I do.

 

[Tarheel]

That sentence needs "to", thus: "I wonder if I need to fill in a form."

 

[Erbista]

That sentence needs "to", thus: "I wonder if I need to fill in a form."

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

 

[probus]

@Erbista you have stumbled upon a difference between BrE and AmE. While it's fine to use "you needn't" do this or that in BrE, @Tarheel is right when it comes to AmE. We North Americans never omit the "to" in "need to".