Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

English grammar - have to and must?

Hi everyone! I can't quite understand the difference between "must" and "have to" in the following situation.

Let's say, there's an army officer talking to a soldier. Would he say: "You must follow my orders" or "You have to follow my orders?" Which is more natural?

Thank you:))

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 4 years ago

    Must - is very emphatic, Have to- is not so.Have to --is like saying you have to follow the rules.I have seen Army officers at work.They will never use -Have to - when they want to be authoritative.

  • God
    Lv 7
    4 years ago

    Either is perfectly correct, but I think have to sounds better.

  • 4 years ago

    Must is an outright command. Have to is milder - I have to do laundry today. But you must report to the gym at 9 AM.

  • 4 years ago

    You have to attend the meeting. It's part of your job.

    You must attend the meeting. It's my order.

    You should attend the meeting. You may get a lot of useful information.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • James
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    "Must" would be better, in the case of your particular example. If you say "You have to follow my orders" it looks like you're bargaining with the soldier or trying to get his acceptance that you need to be asking, as the phrase "have to" has negative connotations of not wanting to yet still needing to, so you've brought the soldier's feelings about following his orders into question - not good in a situation where your authority should be taken as a given. You don't want them to comprehend, but rather to obey. When comprehension enters, so does the ability to be critical and to refuse an order.

  • Bazza
    Lv 7
    4 years ago

    So much for eduction today. None of the responders know the difference.

    Use 'have to' when the force to do something is some outside authority.

    Use 'must' when it's you yourself.

    e.g. man up on a road-rage charge, talking to his wife:

    "The judge says I have to take 20 hours of anger management."

    e.g. Man in pub with his mates. One suggests another round of drinks.

    "No, I must go, or the misses will be on the warpath."

    "I must remember to pick up my dry-cleaning on the way home. I need my black suit for a funeral tomorrow."

    In your suggested sentences, it is as if the officer is reminding this soldier about army discipline and that he must/ has to follow orders !!! He would say neither.

    " You will follow orders."

  • 4 years ago

    According to the sequence,

    must----------------100%

    be obligated------90%

    have to-------------70%

    should-------------50%

    If there is a conservation btwn soldier and Commander, It is a must to follow, otherwise you'll be fired.

  • 4 years ago

    You must follow my orders. It's an order. But we use "have to" when there is no other choice.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    There is no real difference to most English speakers, even pedants struggle to make any convincing distinction - both indicate that an order is mandatory or compulsory. In the situation you indicate, must would be the more natural.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.