Hay que vs. deber vs. haber de

[laepelba]

¿En cuáles situaciones se debe usar "hay que", "deber", o "haber de"?

Mis ejemplos (¿están correctos?):
- Hay que quitar la nieve de las calles.
- Para aprobar esta clase, se debe hacer todos las tareas.
- El ha de venir y ha de ponerlo todo en orden.

Gracias!

[poli]

¿En cuáles situaciones se debe usar "hay que", "deber", o "haber de"?

Mis ejemplos (¿están correctos?):
- Hay que quitar la nieve de las calles.
- Para aprobar esta clase, se debe hacer todos las tareas.
- El ha de venir y ha de ponerlo todo en orden.

Gracias!
Deber de in the strongest term. Hay que (a form of haber) is more polite and less forceful. I'm aware of haber de but seldom hear it. It will be iteresting to hear what native speakers

You left out tener que which is somewhere between deber de and hay que in forcefulness

[laepelba]

Thanks!

I feel like I am not typically wrong (at least I don't get corrected) when I use "tener que", which seems to me to be more useful when someone is personally compelled to something.....

The other day, I was trying to say something with "hay que" and my Mexican tutor didn't understand me and finally, after explaining to her in English what I wanted to say, she said "Oh! You should say "deber" for that..."

Then this morning, I read something with the sentence I quoted using "haber de", which I had to look up because I had never seen it before. Wasn't sure if it's something that is used in common everyday conversation or just in writing....

[chileno]

¿En cuáles situaciones se debe usar "hay que", "deber", o "haber de"?

Mis ejemplos (¿están correctos?):
- Hay que quitar la nieve de las calles.
- Para aprobar esta clase, se debe hacer todas las tareas.
- El ha de venir y ha de ponerlo todo en orden.

Gracias!


Hay que quitar la nieve = +- Snow has to be removed off the streets

To approve this class, all homework have to be completed.

He shall come, and he shall put everything in order.

I think that's how it is used in English.

[laepelba]

To me, they all sound the same. What is the difference in Spanish?

[chileno]

To me, they all sound the same. What is the difference in Spanish?

So, to you the following are the same in English?

The snow shall be removed

The snow has to be removed

The snow must be removed.

:eek::thinking:

[laepelba]

First of all, I would never ever say "shall be", but to me, the equivalent would be "the snow will be removed" as in "La nieve estará quitado" or something like that - a future even that will happen without fail.

The second and the third mean exactly the same thing to me. "Has to be" and "must be" are the same....

[chileno]

First of all, I would never ever say "shall be", but to me, the equivalent would be "the snow will be removed" as in "La nieve estará quitado" or something like that - a future even that will happen without fail.

The second and the third mean exactly the same thing to me. "Has to be" and "must be" are the same....

Perhaps I should've said "should"?

:rolleyes:

[laepelba]

Well, shall and should are quite different.

Still, with "should" it's almost the same as the other two - maybe a bit softer. But not much...

So if it's a matter of degree, how would you rank order the following, from least emphatic to strongest?
- tener que
- hay que
- deber
- haber de

[FooWho]

In English, I think the most common use of "shall" is legal. Laws say that something shall be done, meaning it has to be done. If it is not done, the law was broken.

So in Chileno's examples:

The snow shall be removed.
The snow must be removed.
The snow has to be removed.

I would give all of those sentences the same meaning. I agree with Iaepelba that "should" is much different than "shall." Should is more of a suggestion.

[poli]

Deber is very imperative= must. Tener que = to have to.
Hay que = it has to

[Perikles]

In English, I think the most common use of "shall" is legal..Not really. Shall is regularly used as a simple first person future (at least in the UK):

I shall go
you will go
he will go
we shall go
you will go
they will go

But this is not always adhered to. The situation is made complicated by the historical connection between will and want, and also between should and shall (cf. shilly-shally), but here is not really the place for an endless discussion of these nicities.

[laepelba]

Must be a BrE thing - it is simply not used in every day AmE at all....