milky  +  271472 Sat, 23 Sep 06 11:50 PM Interesting that, in modern use, "have + object + to + verb" can express obligation, when it normally expresses possession: She has a train to catch. He has a child to feed. milky Joined on Thu, Jan 15 2004 Senior Member 3,149 Hume said that if we had perfect or complete descriptive knowledge of reality, we could not, by reasoning, derive a single valid "ought". Verbs

	LearningNerd  +  271487 Sun, 24 Sep 06 12:32 AM Yeah, that is interesting. Even in this case, though, it does express possession in a way, like "I have work to do." Well, it expresses some sort of possession and obligation. I guess you could say it emphasizes the fact that the obligation is yours to take care of. There's a subtle difference between "I have to do something" and "I have something to do" -- but I'm sure everyone has his own opinion of what that subtle difference is. LearningNerd Joined on Fri, Sep 8 2006 USA Junior Member 58 LearningNerd Verbs, Difference Between

	MrPedantic  +  271491 Sun, 24 Sep 06 12:36 AM Cf. Trollope, in his Autobiography: 1. I have from the first felt sure that the writer, when he sits down to commence his novel, should do so, not because he has to tell a story, but because he has a story to tell. MrP MrPedantic Joined on Tue, Oct 12 2004 Veteran Member 13,616 ...opella forensis / adducit febris... Verbs

	LearningNerd  +  271501 Sun, 24 Sep 06 12:52 AM Great quote! In that context, the meaning is completely different. If you changed the original examples, though, would their meaning change? "She has a train to catch." "She has to catch a train." "He has a child to feed." "He has to feed a child." One version emphasizes the action more than the object, while the other emphasizes the object more than the action. LearningNerd Verbs

	milky  +  271505 Sun, 24 Sep 06 12:56 AM  MrPedantic wrote: Cf. Trollope, in his Autobiography: 1. I have from the first felt sure that the writer, when he sits down to commence his novel, should do so, not because he has to tell a story, but because he has a story to tell. MrP Doesn't every good writer feel the necessity to write? milky Verbs

	milky  +  271506 Sun, 24 Sep 06 12:59 AM <Great quote! " src="/emoticons/emotion-1.gif"> In that context, the meaning is completely different. > Maybe not. Many artists produce there works out of necessity. I have a story to tell = I feel a need inside me that my story be heard . milky Verbs

	LearningNerd  +  271510 Sun, 24 Sep 06 01:17 AM That's true, but the quote points out the distinction between needing to write a story and having a story in the first place. It's like saying "I have to say something" versus "I have something to say." If you have to say something, you might feel forced to speak due to the current situation, but that doesn't necessarily mean you actually have anything to say. You could feel obligated to say something and not know what to say. But if you have something to say, you know exactly what to say and you want to say it. Of course, both sentences could be used in different ways. The meanings are vague, subjective, and overlapping in many cases. LearningNerd Verbs

	milky  +  271514 Sun, 24 Sep 06 01:24 AM < That's true, but the quote points out the distinction between needing to write a story and having a story in the first place.> One has a story, what does one want to do with it and why? I feel that the quote expresses possession and neccesity. milky Verbs

	milky  +  271515 Sun, 24 Sep 06 01:26 AM <It's like saying "I have to say something" versus "I have something to say."> Foe me, they both mean "I feel a need to say something" or "I want to speak". If you didn't have anything to say, you wouldn't feel the need to claim that you had. milky Verbs