Didhe have to doit? He did not have to do it
In negative sentences to have to denotes absence of necessity
(compare with the negative form of must which expresses prohibi-
tion).
1 The interrogative and negative forms of the modal verb to have to built up without
the auxiliary do are uncommon in American English and infrequent in British English-
e.g.You don't have to gothere. (Вам не нужно/нет необходимо-
сти идти гуда.)
You mustn'tgo there. (Вам нельзя идти туда.)
§ 94. In spoken English the meaning of obligation and necessi-
ty is also expressed by have (has) got to. Like the verb to have to,
it is found in all kinds of sentences and is combined with the sim-
ple infinitive.
e.g. He has got to goright now.
Hashe got togo right now?
He hasn'tgot to gojust yet.
This combination may also be found in the past tense, though
it is not very common.
e.g. He had gotto sell his car.
§ 95. Note the set phrase had better.
e.g. A few drops began to fall. "We'd better takeshelter," she
said. (Нам лучше укрыться.)
She didn't like to say that she thought they had better not
play cards when the guest might come in at any moment.
Had better is followed by the infinitive without to.
to be to
§ 96. To be to as a modal verb is used in the present and past
tenses.
e.g.We are to meetat six.
We were to meetat six.
§ 97.To be to as a modal verb has the following meanings:
1) a previously arranged plan or obligationresulting from the
arrangement,
e-g. We areto discuss it next time.
We were to discuss it the following week.
Is he to arrive tomorrow?
Who was tospeak at the meeting?
This meaning of to be to is found in affirmative and interro-
gative sentences in the present and past tenses. To be to is fol-
lowed by the simple infinitive.
The past tense of the verb to be to in combination with the
Perfect infinitive denotes an unfulfilled plan.
e.g. I promised to go to a club with her last Tuesday, and I really
forgot all about it. We were to have played a duet together.
2) orders and instructions, often official (frequently in report-
ed speech),
e.g. I just mention it because you said I was to give you all the
details I could.
Norman says I am to leave you alone.
All junior officers are to report to the colonel at once.
In this meaning to be to is found in affirmative and negative
sentences and followed by the simple infinitive.
3) something that is destined to happen,
e.g. He was to be my teacher and friend for many years to come.
He did not know at the time that he was never to see his na-
tive place again.
It's been a great blow to me that you haven't been able to
follow me in my business as I followed my father. Three
generations, that would have been. But it wasn't to be.
This meaning of to be to is rendered in Russian as суждено. It
is mainly found in the past tense and its application is limited to
narration. It occurs in affirmative and negative sentences and is
followed by the simple infinitive.
4) possibility,
e.g. Her father was often to be seen in the bar of the Hotel Metro
pole.
Where is he to be found?
Nothing was to be done under the circumstances.
In this meaning to be to is equivalent to can or may. It is used
in all kinds of sentences in the present and past tenses and is fol'
lowed by the passive infinitive.
§ 98. Note the following set phrases with the modal verb to be to:
What am I to do? (Что мне делать? Как мне быть?)
What is to become of me? (Что со мной станется? Что со
мной будет?)
Where am I to go? (Куда же мне идти? Куда же мне деваться?)
§ 99. То be to in the form of were to + infinitive for all per-
sons is found in conditional clauses where it is structurally depen-
dent (for a detailed treatment of this use of the verb to be to see
"Verbs", § 149).
e.g. If he were to come again I should not receive him.
musty to have to andto be to Compared
§ 100.The verbs must, to have to and to be to have one mean-
ing in common, that of obligation. In the present tense the verbs
come very close to each other in their use, though they preserve
their specific shades of meaning. Thus must indicates obligation
or necessity from the speaker's viewpoint, i.e. it expresses obliga-
tion imposed by the speaker.
e.g. I must do it. (/ want to do it.)
He must do it himself. (7 shan't help him.)
To have to expresses obligation or necessity imposed by circum-
stances.
e.g. What a pity you have to go now. (It's time for you to catch
your train.)
He has to do it himself. (He has got no one to help him.)
To be to expresses obligation or necessity resulting from an
arrangement.
e-g. We are to wait for them at the entrance. (We have arranged
to meet there, so we must wait for them at the appointed
place.)
Sometimes the idea of obligation is absent and to be to ex-
presses only a previously arranged plan.
e-g. We are to go to the cinema tonight.
Note. In public notices we find must because they express obligation imposed
by some authorities.
e.g. Passengers mustcross the railway line by the foot bridge.
The same is true of prohibition expressed in negative sentences,
e.g. Passengers must not walkacross the railway line.
Visitors must not feedthe animals.
In the past tense, however, the difference in the use of the
three verbs is quite considerable.
Must has no past tense. It is used in past-time contexts only in
reported speech.
e.g. He said he must doit himself.
Had to + infinitive is generally used to denote an action which
was realized in the past as a result of obligation or necessity im-
posed by circumstances,
e.g. I had to sellmy car. (It was necessary for me to do it because
I needed money.)
He had to put onhis raincoat. (It was raining hard out side
and he would have got wet if he hadn't.)
Was (were) to + infinitive is used to denote an action planned
for the future which is viewed from the past. The action was not
realized in the past and the question remains open as to whether it
is going to take place.
e.g. We were tomeet him at the station. (It is not clear from the
sentence if the action will take place.)
If the speaker wishes to make it clear at once that the plan
was not fulfilled, the perfect infinitive is used to show that,
e.g. We were to havemet him at the station. (That means that
we failed to meet him.)
However, the simple infinitive may also be used in this case.
§ 101.In reported speech (in past-time contexts) must remains
unchanged in all of its meanings.
e.g. He said he must doit without delay.
He said I mustn't tellanyone about it.
The doctor told her that she must eat.
They believed the story must betrue.
Parallel to must, had to + infinitive is also used occasionally
reported speech to express obligation.
. He said he had to makea telephone call at once.
In this case had to is close to must in meaning: it does not in-
clude the idea of a realized action but refers to some future moment.
Note. Care should be taken not to replace must by had to in reported speech as
two verbs express different meanings (see above).
ought to
§ 102.The modal verb ought tohas only one form which is used
with reference to the present or future. In reported speech it re-
ins unchanged. Ought is always followed by the infinitive with to.
§ 103.Ought to has the following meanings:
1) obligation,which in different contexts may acquire addi-
tinal shades of meaning, such as advisabilityand desirability,
;.You ought tosay a word or two about yourself.
Oughtshe to warnhim?
He oughtn't to mentionit to anybody.
In this meaning ought to is possible in all kinds of sentences,
though it is felt to be awkward in questions where should ispre-
ferred.
Generally ought to refers an action to the future and is fol-
lowed by the simple infinitive. With reference to the present ought
to is used with the continuous infinitive or with the simple infini-
tive if the verb is stative.
e.g. At your age you ought to be earningyour living.
You ought to feelsome respect for your elders.
In combination with the perfect infinitive ought to in the affir-
mative form shows that a desirable action was not fulfilled.
e-g. You ought to have chosena more suitable time to tell me
this news.
He ought to have put everything off.
In the negative form ought to in combination with the Perfect
infinitive shows that an undesirable action was fulfilled.
e.g. I'm sorry. I oughtn't to have said it.
You oughtn't to have married her, David. It was a great mis-
take.
2) supposition implying strong probability,
e.g. The new sanatorium ought to be very comfortable.
The use of ought to in this case is not very common as this
meaning is normally rendered by must.
Note the set phrases He/you ought to know it (=he is/you are
supposed to know it). You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
shall and should
§ 104. Historically, shall and should were two forms of the
same verb expressing obligation. 1 But later they came to express
different meanings and in present-day English their use is not par-
allel — they are treated as two different verbs.
shall
§ 105. In modern English the modal meaning of obligation in
shall is always combined with the function of an auxiliary verb of
the future tense.
Shall is still used to express obligation with the second and
third persons, but at present it is not common in this meaning in
spoken English. Its use, as a rule, is restricted to formal or even
archaic style and is mainly found in subordinate clauses, i.e. it is
structurally dependent,
e.g. It has been decided that the proposal shall not be opposed.
This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by
way of trade, he lent, resold, hired out or otherwise dis-
posed of without the publisher's consent.
1 Shall was the present tense of the Indicative Mood; should was the Subjunctive
Mood.
At present, however, this meaning of obligation, somewhat
modified, is found with the second and third persons in sentences
expressing promise, threat or warning. It is used in affirmative
and negative sentences and combined with the simple infinitive.
e.g. You shall have my answer tomorrow.
"You shall stay just where you are!" his mother cried angrily.
He shall do as I say.
The meaning of obligation may also be traced in interrogative
sentences where shall is used with the first and third persons to
ask after the will of the person addressed. In this case it is also
followed by the simple infinitive.
e.g. Shall I get you some fresh coffee, Miss Fleur?
Who shall answer the telephone, Major?
Sentences of this kind are usually rendered in Russian with the
help of the infinitive: Принести вам еще кофе? Кому отвечать
по телефону? etc.
should
§ 106. In modern English the modal verb should is used with
reference to the present or future. It remains unchanged in re-
ported speech.
§ 107. Should has the following meanings:
1) obligation, which in different contexts may acquire addi-
tional shades of meaning, such as advisability and desirability,
e.g. It's late. You should go to bed.
You shouldn't miss the opportunity.
Should I talk to him about it?
Should in this meaning is found in all kinds of sentences. Like
ought to, it generally refers an action to the future and is followed
by the simple infinitive.
With reference to the present should is used with the Continu-
ous infinitive or with the simple infinitive if the verb is stative.
e-g- You shouldn't be sitting in the sun. Move out of it into the
hade.
You shouldn't feel so unhappy over such trifles.
Should may be combined with the Perfect infinitive. In this
case the meaning of the combination depends on whether the sen-
tence is affirmative or negative. In an affirmative sentence should +
Perfect infinitive indicates that a desirable action was not carried
out.
e.g. He looks very ill. He should havestayed at home.
He should have toldme about it himself.
In a negative sentence should + Perfect infinitive serves to
show that an undesirable action was carried out.
e.g. Oh, Renny, you shouldn't have doneas you did!
They shouldn't have concealedit from us.
2) suppositionimplying strong probability,
e.g. The film should bevery good as it is starring first-class
actors.
The use of should in this case does not seem to be very com-
mon as this meaning is usually rendered by must.
§ 108.In addition to the above mentioned cases showing the
independent use of should, this verb occurs in certain object
clauses where it depends on the lexical character of the predicate
verb in the principal clause and in adverbial clauses of condition,
purpose and concession. Here its use is structurally dependent
(for a detailed treatment of this use of the verb see "Verbs",
§§129, 131, 138, 140, 143, 149).
e.g, 1 suggest that you should stayhere as if nothing had happened.
"It's important," I broke out, "that the Barford people
should knowwhat we've just heard."
She was terrified lest they shouldgo ontalking about her.
Suddenly she began to cry, burying her. head under the book
so that I shouldn't see.
Ifhe should dropin, give him my message.
§ 109.Should may have a peculiar function — it may be used
for emotional colouring. In this function it may be called the
emotional should. The use of the emotional should is structurally
dependent. It is found in the following cases:
1) In special emphatic constructions, where a simple predicate
isnot used:
a) in rhetorical questionsbeginning with why,
e.g. Why should I doit? (С какой стати я буду делать это?)
Why shouldn'tyou invitehim? (Почему бы вам его не при-
гласить?)
b)in object clausesbeginning with why,
e.g. I don't know why he should wantto see George. (Я не знаю,
зачем ему нужен Джордж.)
I don't see why we shouldn't makefriends,
c) in attributive clausesbeginning with why after the noun
reason,
e.g. There is no reason why they shouldn't get onvery well to-
gether. (Нет причины, почему бы им не ладить друг с
другом.)
I don't see any reason why he shouldn't be happy,
d)in constructions of the following kind,
e.g. The door opened and who should come inbut Tom. (Дверь
открылась, и кто бы вы думали вошел? Не кто иной,
как Том.)
As I was crossing the street, whom should I meetbut Aunt
Ann.
e) in the set phraseHow should I know? (Почем я знаю?).
In the above cases should may be followed by the Perfect in-
finitive which in simple sentences refers the action to the past (a)
and in complex sentences shows that the action of the subordinate
clause precedes that of the principal clause (b).
e-g. a) I went into business with her as her partner. Why shouldn't
I have doneit? (Почему бы мне было не сделать этого?)
b) He did not know why he should have expectedthem to
look different. (Он не знал, почему он ожидал увидеть
их другими.)
There were fifteen equally good reasons why she should
not have playedbridge.
2) In certain types of subordinate clauses where should + in-
finitive is interchangeable with a simple predicate in the Indica-
tive Mood (for the use of the Indicative Mood in these clauses see
"Verbs", § 130):
a) in object clausesafter expressions of regret, surprise,
sometimes pleasure or displeasure,
e.g. I'm sorry that you should thinkso badly of me. (Мне жаль,
что вы так плохо обо мне думаете.)
Не was little surprised that Ann should speakso frankly
about it.
I am content that you should thinkso.
Therules of the sequence of tenses are not observed here. The
Perfect infinitive is used to show that the action of the subordi
nate clause precedes that of the principal clause,
e.g. I am sorry that you should have hada row with Kate about it.
He was annoyed that they should have askedhim that,
b) in object clausesfollowing the principal clause with it as a
formal subject,
e.g. It is absurd that such things should happento a family like
theirs. (Нелепо, чтобы такие вещи случались в такой се-
мье, как их.)
It was strange that he should beasking those questions.
It struck him as exceedingly funny that his brother should
bein love.
In the principal clause we find such expressions as it is won-
derful (absurd, monstrous, natural, odd, queer, singular, strange,
terrible and the like), it infuriated (outraged, puzzled, startled,
surprised and the like) me, it struck me as funny, etc. We also
find the following interrogative and negative expressions in the
principal clause: is it possible {likely, probable)?, it is not possible
(likely, probable), it is impossible (improbable, unlikely). '
Aswe see from the above examples, the rules of the sequence
of tenses are not observed here either.
If the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the
principal clause, the Perfect infinitive is used after should.
1 After the affirmative it is possible (likely, probable) a simple predicate is used"
e.g. It is inconceivable that Mrs Crosbie should have writtensuch
a letter.
It's much better that you should have foundeverything out
before it's too late.
It infuriated her that he should have spokento her in such a
tone.
Note. Should + infinitive may be occasionally found instead of a simple predi-
cate in some other kinds of subordinate clauses, but it is not in common use:
a) in predicative clauses,
e.g. The part that interests me is that such a thing should happento such people.
b) in appositive clauses,
e.g. The fact that he should havemade such a brilliant speech surprised me greatly.
c) in constructions of the following kind,
e.g. That it should cometo this! (И до чего дошло дело!)
То think that it should cometo this! (Только подумать, до
чего дошло дело!)
То think that it should have happenedto me! (Только поду-
мать, что это произошло со мной!)
То sum it up, it should be said that as compared to the use of
a simple predicate in the Indicative Mood, the use of should + in-
finitive gives the statement emotional colouring such as surprise,
amazement, irritation, indignation, pleasure, displeasure, etc., i.e.
it emphasizes the speaker's personal attitude towards the facts
stated in the sentence. The Indicative Mood represents these facts
in a more matter-of-fact way.