They're at that age; 'should' vs 'ought to'
Django Cat
questions again (well, not that difficult this time...)
Today it was the difference between 'should and 'ought to':
- You should phone your mother;
- You ought to phone your mother.
I told them:
a) I don't hear much of a difference
b) I tell my students up to upper-intermediate level that they mean the same
thing;
c) I also tell students to learn to recognise 'ought to', but to use 'should'
in their own writing, in case they start making mistakes with the more complex
'ought to' which they didn't ought to not do.
However, when we looked this difference up in Swan we found he detects a
difference in nuance - though I'm not convinced.
Once again I'd be grateful for citations, but more for AUErs gut reactions.
DC
--
Marius Hancu
Quirk, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, 1985, has p.
227 dedicated to the pair.
Not too much in terms of difference between "ought to" and "should,"
except that in both cases of:
a) Tentative inference, e.g.
"Sarah (should, ought to) be home by now , but she isn't.
b) Obligation, e.g.
"You (should, ought to) do as he says."
"should" is more "frequent" than "ought to."
However, there's quite a lot in contrasting them with "must." If
you're interested in that, I can post.
Marius Hancu
Marius Hancu
---------
LESSON 27
Should and ought to
Computer Voice: The difference between 'ought to' and 'should'.
Both are used to talk about duties or obligations, to give advice and
to say what we think is right for people to do.
We can use both 'should' and 'ought to' to talk about our own
feelings.
But we usually prefer to use 'ought to' when we are talking about
outside rules or laws and so on.
Jane: …yeah. I'm having real problems. I'm finding it impossible to
sleep. Every time a bus passes, someone's car alarm goes off. I hate
those car alarms!
Sheila: I know what you mean, but they do stop people stealing them,
don't they?
Jane: Hah! I wish. You should've been at my place this week! Car
alarms from morning to night. And not one thief in sight
http://www.bbc.co.uk/polish/exr/mc/mc27.htm
----------
Marius Hancu
Django Cat
>
>Hello, DC:
>
>Quirk, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, 1985, has p.
>227 dedicated to the pair.
>
>Not too much in terms of difference between "ought to" and "should,"
>except that in both cases of:
>
>a) Tentative inference, e.g.
>
>"Sarah (should, ought to) be home by now , but she isn't.
>
>b) Obligation, e.g.
>
>"You (should, ought to) do as he says."
>
>"should" is more "frequent" than "ought to."
Ah, that's an important thing to note - lets have a look at the big
concordancer:
'ought to' 27m Google hits
'should' 1280m Google hits
>
>However, there's quite a lot in contrasting them with "must." If
>you're interested in that, I can post.
>
Thanks Marius, but I'm OK on that one!
DC
--
Django Cat
>Found this at the BBC:
>---------
>LESSON 27
>Should and ought to
>
>Computer Voice: The difference between 'ought to' and 'should'.
>
>Both are used to talk about duties or obligations, to give advice and
>to say what we think is right for people to do.
>
>We can use both 'should' and 'ought to' to talk about our own
>feelings.
>
>But we usually prefer to use 'ought to' when we are talking about
>outside rules or laws and so on.
>
>
>Jane: 厃eah. I'm having real problems. I'm finding it impossible to
>sleep. Every time a bus passes, someone's car alarm goes off. I hate
>those car alarms!
>Sheila: I know what you mean, but they do stop people stealing them,
>don't they?
>Jane: Hah! I wish. You should've been at my place this week! Car
>alarms from morning to night. And not one thief in sight
>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/polish/exr/mc/mc27.htm
>----------
>
Yes, this is the distinction Swan makes - sometimes called 'internal versus
external obligation' - but I'm not convinced.
DC
--
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
My gut reaction is that *if* there is a difference, then "you ought" expresses
a duty or obligation, whereas "you should" may express a duty or obligation,
or may simply be a recommendation.
In speech I would use tone of voice to distinguish between these. In writing I
would use extra words to make clear what I meant.
I would not rely on anyone picking up a distinction between "you ought" and
"you should" without additional cues.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
jerry_f...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:29:02 GMT, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.co.uk> wrote:
> >It's Friday afternoon, and my Chinese ESOL Teachers have been asking difficult
> >questions again (well, not that difficult this time...)
>
> >Today it was the difference between 'should and 'ought to':
>
> >- You should phone your mother;
> >- You ought to phone your mother.
>
> >I told them:
>
> >a) I don't hear much of a difference
> >b) I tell my students up to upper-intermediate level that they mean the same
> >thing;
> >c) I also tell students to learn to recognise 'ought to', but to use 'should'
> >in their own writing, in case they start making mistakes with the more complex
> >'ought to' which they didn't ought to not do.
>
> >However, when we looked this difference up in Swan we found he detects a
> >difference in nuance - though I'm not convinced.
>
> >Once again I'd be grateful for citations, but more for AUErs gut reactions.
>
> My gut reaction is that *if* there is a difference, then "you ought" expresses
> a duty or obligation, whereas "you should" may express a duty or obligation,
> or may simply be a recommendation.
I think it's the other way around for me. I don't use "ought" much
(and a large proportion of the times I use it are in "There oughta be
a law"), but I think I'm more likely to use it as a recommendation,
often jocular, "I'd be amused if you followed this suggestion."
> In speech I would use tone of voice to distinguish between these. In writing I
> would use extra words to make clear what I meant.
>
> I would not rely on anyone picking up a distinction between "you ought" and
> "you should" without additional cues.
Can't argue with that.
--
Jerry Friedman
Django Cat
>>I told them:
>>
>>a) I don't hear much of a difference
>>b) I tell my students up to upper-intermediate level that they mean the same
>>thing;
>>c) I also tell students to learn to recognise 'ought to', but to use
>>'should' in their own writing, in case they start making mistakes with the
>>more complex 'ought to' which they didn't ought to not do.
>>
>>However, when we looked this difference up in Swan we found he detects a
>>difference in nuance - though I'm not convinced.
>>
>>Once again I'd be grateful for citations, but more for AUErs gut reactions.
>>
>>
>My gut reaction is that if there is a difference, then "you ought" expresses
>a duty or obligation, whereas "you should" may express a duty or obligation,
>or may simply be a recommendation.
Mmm, that's true. We also tell students about the use of 'must' for a strong
recommendation:
- You must go to the Covent Garden when you visit London! [with the right
intonation]
and 'should' can work in the same way:
- When you visit San Francisco you should try the clam chowder and sourdough
bread
I wonder if 'ought to' works like this...
'When you go to Scotland you ought to visit the highlands'
Mmm, maybe not, maybe there's a bit of moral obligation here - 'going to
Scotland? It would be a *shame* not to visit the Highlands...'
>
>In speech I would use tone of voice to distinguish between these. In writing I
>would use extra words to make clear what I meant.
>
Well, yes, in today's class on modal verbs we discussed how intonation defines
how a modal verb is being used. If I write:
- You can play the guitar
It's ambiguous; but in speech I can use intonation (what you've called 'tone of
voice') to make it perfectly clear whether this is 'can' for permission or
'can' for ability.
>I would not rely on anyone picking up a distinction between "you ought" and
>"you should" without additional cues.
>
My feeling as well.
DC
--
dearcilla
> > Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote
[...]
> >I would not rely on anyone picking up a distinction between "you ought" and
> >"you should" without additional cues.
>
> My feeling as well.
>
> DC
>
> --
I am in the NE US, and after racking my brains, can't think of any
rationale to prefer one or the other in any context. Logically, there
ought to (should) be some reason why I say one or the other, but I
can't imagine what.
John Dean
Gut?
"You should phone your mother" can mean two things:
a) You should, at this moment or soon thereafter, phone your mother. (You
haven't phoned for a while, she may be anxious yada yada)
b) You have a moral obligation to keep in touch with your mother by phone.
"You ought to phone your mother" is either essentially (b) above but with an
element of "You should have done it before now. You are remiss and overdue."
or it is essentially (a) but with a sense of "It's the right thing to do" as
opposed to "should" conveying "This is my advice"
Stage three would be "You *really* ought to phone your mother"
--
John Dean
Oxford
Django Cat
>>Once again I'd be grateful for citations, but more for AUErs gut
>>reactions.
>>
>>DC
>
>Gut?
>"You should phone your mother" can mean two things:
>
>a) You should, at this moment or soon thereafter, phone your mother. (You
>haven't phoned for a while, she may be anxious yada yada) b) You have a moral
>obligation to keep in touch with your mother by phone.
>
>"You ought to phone your mother" is either essentially (b) above but with an
>element of "You should have done it before now. You are remiss and overdue."
>or it is essentially (a) but with a sense of "It's the right thing to do" as
>opposed to "should" conveying "This is my advice" Stage three would be "You
>really ought to phone your mother"
>--
>
Thanks, John. So, internal vs external obligation... or, 'I'm telling you that
this is the right thing to do' (should) vs 'the rules are that this is the
right thing to do' (ought to).
Hmm...
dc
--
Marius Hancu
Ought To
http://www.englishpage.com/modals/oughtto.html
Should
http://www.englishpage.com/modals/should.html
Marius Hancu
Marius Hancu
http://www.englishforums.com/English/OughtToVsShould/drjxm/post.htm#253583
He quotes a good book, Palmer.
Marius Hancu
Django Cat
>This may help your students:
>
>Ought To
>http://www.englishpage.com/modals/oughtto.html
I don't think I'd want them to say
- 'Mark ought not drink so much.'
without 'to' as recommended on that page. That sounds non-standard to me, but
I'd be interested to hear if NorthAmE AUErs agree.
>
>Should
>http://www.englishpage.com/modals/should.html
>
Both pages talk about 'strong probability', though the 'should' page uses the
term 'expectation', which I've not thought about before. To me
- By now, they should already be in Dubai.
and
- By now, they ought to already be in Dubai. [that 'already' could probably
move around here]
are the same.
DC
--
Django Cat
>You may want to see what CalifJim says here:
>
>http://www.englishforums.com/English/OughtToVsShould/drjxm/post.htm#253583
>
>He quotes a good book, Palmer.
>
CalifJim gives this example:
"'evaluative' should
- It's strange that he should say such a thing."
in fact I'm not at all sure about that one... isn't that some kind of
subjunctive or conditional? A bit like
- Should I see him, I'll tell him.
I also don't agree with him that 'ought to' sounds scholarly. Any piece of
language that can be contracted is going to sound 'scholarly' if you say it in
full; if you say
- 'I have been to the park'
enunciating the 'have', it sounds more 'scholarly' than
- 'I've been to the park'.
But maybe this is an AmE thing. Brit posters will remember the TV advert
(though I can't actually remember what the product was [1]) with the posh girl
learning to talk 'common' (basically turning the My Fair Lady scenario on its
head). The phrase she was trying to learn was:
- The water in Mallorca doesn't taste like it ought to
but she couldn't get it right:
- The worter in Majorca don't taste like it orter.
Hang on... God Bless YouTube, it's here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uz9_YfIQaz4
DC [1] Heineken lager
--
Marius Hancu
> - It's strange that he should say such a thing."
>
> in fact I'm not at all sure about that one... isn't that some kind of
> subjunctive or conditional? A bit like
>
> - Should I see him, I'll tell him.
I think it's both, depending on the school of thought. It's
subjunctive mood as per the classical book by G. Curme, "A Grammar of
the English Language," whose view is replicated at Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive_mood
Curme was a professor at the University of Southern California (1930s)
and his chapters on the subjunctive are the best I know of.
However, the teaching of the full subjunctive mood hasn't been done
in the last decades, and even very reputable grammar teachers don't
know about all its forms as in the article from Wiki.
Many of them just call it "conditional" these days.
Marius Hancu
Marius Hancu
> CalifJim gives this example:
>
> "'evaluative' should
>
> - It's strange that he should say such a thing."
>
> in fact I'm not at all sure about that one... isn't that some kind of
> subjunctive or conditional?
I think those examples are straight from Palmer (not sure).
The book is "The English Verb" and Palmer was a prof at U of Reading
in the UK.
Now, you can call it "evaluative" and still have it expressed by a
subjunctive. There's no conflict as far as I can tell between the two
notions.
Marius Hancu