The verb have has a very wide application both independently and in conjunction with other words. In addition, there are many overlapping areas with other similar verbs.
Need to vs. have to
In order to talk about the need to do something, you can use the verb need to.
You may need to show yourself to the doctor.
A number of questions must be asked.
And in contrast, to express the lack of necessity, something to do is used. Do not have, do not need to, have not got to, or need not.
Many women do not have to work.
/ You do not need to learn any new typing skills.
You do not need to buy anything.
I do not have to go to work.
- I can pick John up. I need not bother John. You do not have to bother yourself.
To express permission for someone not to do something, use need not.
/ You do not have to say anything if you do not want to.
/ You do not need to stay any more tonight.
To clarify that someone did what wasdoes not necessarily have to do, is used need not have or need not have and the past participle. Often such a design appeals to cases when, at the time of the commission of an actor, he himself did not suspect that there was no need to commit such an act.
I did not have to wait for the game to begin.
Nel did not have to work.
They did not have to worry about Reagan.
If the performer at the time of the actionI knew that there was no need for action, it would be more appropriate to say that I did not need to. Such a clarification is due to the fact that in the present tense there is a hypothetical need in general, and in the past tense it is precisely a specific action committed without necessity.
They did not need to talk about it.
I did not have to worry.
Also, with the difference that when I did not need tothe speaker is not sure whether the incident actually occurred until he received additional information, for which he could have used and the modal verb have to. Examples:
He did not have to talk.
/ Bill and I did not have to pay / Bill and I did not have to pay.
Must vs. have to
Modal verbs must, have to sometimesare interchangeable. So, the verb have come to the aid of the must in the past tense, if one needs to focus on something that should not have happened in the past. It is possible to replace the must on It was necessary, It was important, had to make certain, and had similar to, the modal verb in conjunction with them means "it was important / necessary" or "it was important / necessary make sure".
It was absolutely necessary that no one suspected that they were watching him.
You should have made sure that you did not spend too much.
We had to do everything in our power to make sure that it was not obsolete.
It was important not to take the game too seriously.
Should and ought vs. have to
Should and ought can be used to say about moderate necessity, that is, the sense of necessity is not as strong as if we were using the must.
Should and ought are very common in conversationalEnglish. Should, being a true modal verb, requires the use of the subsequent verb in the basic form. And ought requires a to-infinitive. Negation with these verbs looks like should not, should not, ought not, oughtn't and means that there is a moderate need not to do anything.
There are three cases in which should be put, ought:
1) When it comes to the performance of any positive or correct action.
- We should send her a postcard. We must send her a postcard.
2) When you want to advise someone to do something or not to do.
- You should claim your pension 3-4 months before you retire. / You must apply for a pension 3-4 months before you leave.
3) When you express your point of view or ask someone else's opinion. In order to begin the sentence, often used: I think, I do not think, or Do you think.
- I think that we should be paid more. / I think we should pay more.
Try to distinguish between cases in which should, ought and the modal verb have to. The exercises below contain omissions, fill them:
- We _______ spend all the money. We do not have to spend all the money.
- He ______ come more often. / He should have come more often.
- You ______ see him again. / You do not need to see him again.
- You ______ use a detergent. / You should not use a detergent.
- You ______ get a new TV. You need a new TV.
- You ______ marry him. You should not marry him.
- I do not think we are ______ grumble. / I do not think we should complain.
- Do you think he ______ go? / You think he should not go?
- What do you think we ______ do? / What do you think we should do?
To say that in the past there wasa moderate need to do something, but the action was not committed, used: should have or ought to have with the past participle. For example, if it says I should have given him the money yesterday, I mean that yesterday there was a moderate need for money transfer, but money was not transferred.
- I should have finished my drink and gone home. / I had to finish my drink and go home.
- You should have realized that he was joking. / You should have realized that he was joking.
- We ought to have stayed in tonight. We should have stayed this night.
- They ought to have taken a taxi. / They had to call a taxi.
If you want to say that it was not importantdo something in the past, but, nevertheless, it was done, used should not have, ought not to have. For example, if it says: I should not have left the door open, it is implied that it was important that someone did not leave the door open, but the door, nevertheless, remained open.
- I should not have said that. / I should not have said that.
- You should not have given him the money. / I should not give him money.
- They ought not to have told him. / They should not have told him.
- She oughtn't to have sold the ring. She should not have sold the ring.
To point out a moderate need to doanything in a particular situation, use had to. The modal verb loses to and is added better, forming had better, accompanied by a verb in the basic form. Also had better can be used to give advice or to express one's point of view on any issue. Although usually a negative particle is put immediately after had to, the modal verb and not in this case are divided better. The negative form looks like it had better not.
- I think I had better show this to you now. / I think it's better to show you this now.
- You'd better go tomorrow. / You'd better go tomorrow.
Although it had better resembles the past tense, it is never used for moderate necessity in the past. And the correct form is always had better (do not say have better).
- I'd better not look at this. / I better not look at this.
Thus, in the range of values have a lotseparate semantic units, which do not always behave according to general logic. For example, had to (the modal verb have to in II form) does not always indicate the elapsed time.