0
Paco2004 Posted 20 years ago
Grammar
"had to V" and "was supposed to V"
Hello Teachers
I am still confused with the usage of "had to V". OED says about "have to V" that it means the subject possesses a duty to be done, which is expressed in "to V". The dictionary says nothing to the problem whether "had to V" implies the activity expressed in "to V" actually was done or not. And indeed, a Japanese grammar site for English learners says that "had to V" is neutral about the question whether the activity actually took place, which is contrasted to "was supposed to V" that commonly implies the activity didn't take place.
But I found [url=http://www.answerway.com/viewans.php?pgtitle=&expid=richturner&category=460&msection=&quesid=19780&ansid=68561] a Q&A online[/url] that is saying as follows.
(Q)Which of the following sentences is correct and natural?
1. He should have fought in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
2. He was supposed to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
3. He had to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
If all three are correct and possible, do they have the same meaning?
(A)The first two sentences are correct and have the same meaning. The problem with the third (He had to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted) is that "had to" implies that he did fight, so it contradicts the idea that he deserted.
So I would like to ask you whether it is true that "had to V" necessarily implies the activity expressed in "to V" actually was done.
paco
I am still confused with the usage of "had to V". OED says about "have to V" that it means the subject possesses a duty to be done, which is expressed in "to V". The dictionary says nothing to the problem whether "had to V" implies the activity expressed in "to V" actually was done or not. And indeed, a Japanese grammar site for English learners says that "had to V" is neutral about the question whether the activity actually took place, which is contrasted to "was supposed to V" that commonly implies the activity didn't take place.
But I found [url=http://www.answerway.com/viewans.php?pgtitle=&expid=richturner&category=460&msection=&quesid=19780&ansid=68561] a Q&A online[/url] that is saying as follows.
(Q)Which of the following sentences is correct and natural?
1. He should have fought in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
2. He was supposed to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
3. He had to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
If all three are correct and possible, do they have the same meaning?
(A)The first two sentences are correct and have the same meaning. The problem with the third (He had to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted) is that "had to" implies that he did fight, so it contradicts the idea that he deserted.
So I would like to ask you whether it is true that "had to V" necessarily implies the activity expressed in "to V" actually was done.
paco
Top answer
Which of the following sentences is correct and natural? 1. He should have fought in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
- Which of the following sentences is correct and natural?
- 1.
- He should have fought in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
- 2.
- He was supposed to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
14 Answers
0
Which of the following sentences is correct and natural?
1. He should have fought in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
2. He was supposed to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
3. He had to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
If all three are correct and possible, do they have the same meaning?
(A)The first two sen
1. He should have fought in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
2. He was supposed to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
3. He had to fight in the first Gulf War but he deserted.
If all three are correct and possible, do they have the same meaning?
(A)The first two sen
00
Nef"Had to" usually means "needed to and did." "Had to" implies that there is no real alternative or choice. It is stronger than "was supposed to" or "should have," which usually mean "it would have been better to...." "Supposed to" might also imply a sort of measurement against someone else's idea of expected behavior. To me, "I should have" indicates personal acceptan
00
So you mean we can never use "had to do something" in the context we actually did not do it. Right? How about the case like "I know I had to win, and I tried but failed"?
That's an interesting question, and people might see it differently. It's making me think about what I'd said about contradiction.
If someone believes there's an unspoken context (In order to live up to
That's an interesting question, and people might see it differently. It's making me think about what I'd said about contradiction.
If someone believes there's an unspoken context (In order to live up to
00
Hello chaps
1. ?He had to fight in the Gulf War but deserted instead.
2. He knew he had to win, and he tried but failed.
It seems to me that the degree of "necessity" differs here. In #1, "had to" presumably reflects an external requirement (otherwise it would have been "he had to fight"), and it's a literal past tense: so the first clause reports a fact.
In
1. ?He had to fight in the Gulf War but deserted instead.
2. He knew he had to win, and he tried but failed.
It seems to me that the degree of "necessity" differs here. In #1, "had to" presumably reflects an external requirement (otherwise it would have been "he had to fight"), and it's a literal past tense: so the first clause reports a fact.
In
00
Thank you, Nef. Sounds like it's a bit too subtle a problem to determine YES or NO at once. Anyway I'll wait other people's opinions and I myself would like to think over it. Thank you again.
paco
paco
00
MrPedanticIn #2, on the other hand, "he had to win" is a reported version of:Hello MrP
3. I have to win!
So the first clause reports a personal sense of "necessity", at a point where "winning" was simply one possibility. As the second clause shows, it was in fact also possible for him not to win.
Thank you for the reply. I think I got
00
Yes; and on reflection, reported "had to's" often turn out to be not quite as necessary as was supposed:
1. She said she had to go home; but now I know that wasn't true.
2. I thought I had to do it, so I tried; but in the end, I couldn't quite manage it.
3. They knew they had to be here at 6! [They're not here.]
MrP
1. She said she had to go home; but now I know that wasn't true.
2. I thought I had to do it, so I tried; but in the end, I couldn't quite manage it.
3. They knew they had to be here at 6! [They're not here.]
MrP
00
MrPedanticYes; and on reflection, reported "had to's" often turn out to be not quite as necessary as was supposed:Hi Mr P
1. She said she had to go home; but now I know that wasn't true.
2. I thought I had to do it, so I tried; but in the end, I couldn't quite manage it.
3. They knew they had to be here at 6! [They're not here.]
Th
00
Hello Paco
I think that's it. Though there's always the chance that another member will find an exception.
In simple predications, it seems to work for all persons:
1. I/You/He/We/They had to pick up the kids this morning. ] The kids were definitely picked up.
And if there's any doubt, you have to switch to "he was supposed to" or "he was meant to".
A c
I think that's it. Though there's always the chance that another member will find an exception.
In simple predications, it seems to work for all persons:
1. I/You/He/We/They had to pick up the kids this morning. ] The kids were definitely picked up.
And if there's any doubt, you have to switch to "he was supposed to" or "he was meant to".
A c
00
Hello MrP
Frankly speaking, I created this thread because I had been asked by a school teacher whether the sentence below sounds natural to native speakers.
"I had to go to the hospital to see her, but I was too busy to do so"
He said this sentence had been written by one of his students in his English class and he was wondering how to evaluate it.
paco
Frankly speaking, I created this thread because I had been asked by a school teacher whether the sentence below sounds natural to native speakers.
"I had to go to the hospital to see her, but I was too busy to do so"
He said this sentence had been written by one of his students in his English class and he was wondering how to evaluate it.
paco
0
Related Questions