# devoir - to have to



## englishman

I always have difficulty with this verb. I'd be grateful if someone can comment on the following:

je dois - I must, I have to
je devrai - I will have to
je devais - I had to 
j'ai dû - I have had to 
j'avais dû - I had had to
je devrais - I ought to have, I should have
j'aurai dû - I will have had to
j'aurais dû - I ought to have had to, I should have had to


----------



## Ludito

Wow seemed quite easy when you first look at it but then it becomes confusing. This is what I can tell you.


je dois - I must, I have to 
je devrai - I will have to  
je devais - I had to  
j'ai dû - I have had to  Can also be: I had to (present perfect and passé composé can be used differently)

j'avais dû - I had had to   I'm not very sure.

je devrais - I ought to have, I should have 
I ought to / I should ( Je devrais travailler: I should work/I ought to work)

j'aurai dû - I will have had to  I'm not sure we can say that...

j'aurais dû - I ought to have had to, I should have had to  I should have (j'aurais dû travailler: I should have worked)


----------



## englishman

Ludito said:
			
		

> Wow seemed quite easy when you first look at it but then it becomes confusing.


Yes. That's why I call "devoir" the Evil French Verb of Death from Hell.





			
				Ludito said:
			
		

> This is what I can tell you.
> 
> 
> je dois - I must, I have to
> je devrai - I will have to
> je devais - I had to
> j'ai dû - I have had to  Can also be: I had to (present perfect and passé composé can be used differently)
> 
> j'avais dû - I had had to   I'm not very sure.
> 
> je devrais - I ought to have, I should have
> I ought to / I should ( Je devrais travailler: I should work/I ought to work)
> 
> j'aurai dû - I will have had to  I'm not sure we can say that...
> 
> j'aurais dû - I ought to have had to, I should have had to  I should have (j'aurais dû travailler: I should have worked)


1. In English, we can indeed say "I will have had to" or did you mean something else ? (e.g. "By next Tuesday, I will have had to complete all the reports")

2. When would one translate "j'ai dû" as "I had to" and when as "I had had to" ?

3. How does one say "I should have had to" or "I ought to have had to" ?


----------



## Ludito

englishman said:
			
		

> Yes. That's why I call "devoir" the Evil French Verb of Death from Hell.


 
let's just say you English (speakers)  complicate it with four different verbs  must,have to,should,ought to...





			
				englishman said:
			
		

> 1. In English, we can indeed say "I will have had to" or did you mean something else ? (e.g. "By next Tuesday, I will have had to complete all the reports")


 
I suppose j'aurai dû is right then, but I just got confused when looking at all the verbs. It'd be great if another native could confirm.



			
				englishman said:
			
		

> 2. When would one translate "j'ai dû" as "I had to" and when as "I had had to" ?


 
La semaine dernière *j'ai dû* travailler tous les jours jusqu'à 19h
Last week *I had to* work every day till 7pm

_One or more events or actions that began and ended in the past :_ we use the "passé composé"

I'm not sure about being able to explain it completely right now but I definitely want to know now. I remember getting a very clear explanation when I was studying in a translation school. I'll try find it back  




			
				englishman said:
			
		

> 3. How does one say "I should have had to" or "I ought to have had to" ?


 
J'aurais dû devoir  Once again, not very sure. Can someone help us?


----------



## tigrette

I should have had = J'aurais dû

No idea how to translate the futur antérieur though...


----------



## carolineR

"By next Tuesday, I will have had to complete all the reports" se traduirait par : il faudra que j'aie terminé tous les dossiers mardi prochain
En fait l'idée est de substituer il faut que je/ il faudra que je/ il aura fallu que je...il faudrait que je / il aurait fallu que je...  dès que ça devient compliqué


----------



## englishman

tigrette said:
			
		

> I should have had = J'aurais dû
> 
> No idea how to translate the futur antérieur though...


That's what I wrote originally but M. Ludito disagrees - are there any bilingues who can settle this ? 

What's the futur anterieur ? "J'aurai dû" ? If so, I think that's "I will have had to"


----------



## englishman

carolineR said:
			
		

> "By next Tuesday, I will have had to complete all the reports" se traduirait par : il faudra que j'aie terminé tous les dossiers mardi prochain
> En fait l'idée est de substituer il faut que je/ il faudra que je/ il aura fallu que je...il faudrait que je / il aurait fallu que je... dès que ça devient compliqué



Maybe. But that doesn't explain how to translate "j'aurai dû" if you read it though. You've merely finessed the problem into another one (which isn't much easier, as falloir is the 2nd Most Evil French Verb .., "il eût fallu" and all that stuff, aaaarrgggghhhh !!!)


----------



## carolineR

I hink it would be easier for us if you put it in context


----------



## englishman

carolineR said:
			
		

> I hink it would be easier for us if you put it in context



There's no context - I'm merely interested in the standard translation for all the tenses and moods of devoir. I've never seen in written down in full anywhere.


----------



## Pur Esprit

Plus littéralement, "By next Tuesday, I will have had to complete all the reports" peut se dire : "Je devrai avoir terminé tous mes dossiers pour Mardi prochain".


----------



## Aupick

englishman said:
			
		

> tigrette said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I should have had = J'aurais dû
> 
> No idea how to translate the futur antérieur though...
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I wrote originally but M. Ludito disagrees - are there any bilingues who can settle this ?
Click to expand...

I too disagree!

J'aurais dû = I should have
J'aurais dû avoir = I should have had
(theoretically: J'aurais dû devoir = I should have had to)

And in sentences:
*J'aurais dû* écouter ma mère = *I should have* listened to my mother
*J'aurais dû avoir* 16 minimum = *I should have had* at least an A

Also:
*Je devais* implies that the duty was not fulfilled, and so can often be translated as *I was supposed to*
*J'ai dû* can also be used for hypotheses and in the right context can be translated as *I must have*.


----------



## LV4-26

carolineR said:
			
		

> "By next Tuesday, I will have had to complete all the reports" se traduirait par : il faudra que j'aie terminé tous les dossiers mardi prochain


Caroline and Englishman, are you positive it should not be
_I will have to have completed_
instead?


----------



## englishman

Aupick said:
			
		

> I too disagree!
> 
> J'aurais dû = I should have
> J'aurais dû avoir = I should have had
> (theoretically: J'aurais dû devoir = I should have had to)



Yikes. I don't think I've ever seen the second or third forms. It's even trickier than I thought.



			
				Aupick said:
			
		

> Also:
> *Je devais* implies that the duty was not fulfilled, and so can often be translated as *I was supposed to*
> *J'ai dû* can also be used for hypotheses and in the right context can be translated as *I must have*.



Right. Thanks for that - I certainly wasn't aware of the "lack of fulfilment" thing with "devais". Is there any chance you could give a couple of sentences with "je devais" and "j'ai dû" to show the various possible meanings ?

I have to say I'm constantly amazed by how little of all this most grammar books manage to convey.


----------



## englishman

LV4-26 said:
			
		

> Caroline and Englishman, are you positive it should not be
> _I will have to have completed_
> instead?



That is a painfully awkward construction, but it's something that you too often hear spoken in England these days. I guess it's just about acceptable, but it's unpleasant if for no other reason than the repetition of "have". I think, however, that it is semantically equivalent to "I will have had to complete".


----------



## Gardefeu

> What's the futur anterieur ? "J'aurai dû"



No, it's _je devrai avoir_.
_Jeudi prochain,je devrai avoir fini ce travail._


----------



## carolineR

Recap: 
je dois finir ce travail/ Il faut que je finisse ceci = I must/ have to finish this
La semaine dernière j'ai dû travailler tous les jours pour finir ceci/ il a fallu que je travaille... : I had to work everyday last week to finish this.
Je devais finir ce travail aujourd'hui (mais je n'y suis pas arrivé)/ Il fallait que je finisse...= I had to finish this today(but I didn't/ couldn't) or I was supposed to finish this today.
Je devrai finir ce travail demain(rare)/ plutôt : il va falloir que je finisse ce travail demain, car je n'ai plus le temps aujourd'hui : I'll have to finish this tomorrow
Je dois finir/ il faut que je finisse/ ce travail pour demain : I'll have to have finished this by tomorrow (je ne mettrais pas devoir au futur en français : l'obligation n'est pas future, c'est terminer le travail qui l'est)
j'ai dû finir comme j'ai pu/ Il a fallu que je termine comme j'ai pu = I've had to finish the best I could
I had had to : ??? 
I should work more/ I ought to work more : je devrais travailler davantage/ Il faudrait que je travaille davantage (je peux encore le faire, il suffit de m'y mettre)
I should have worked more / I ought to have worked more : j'aurais dû/ Il aurait fallu que je travaille davantage (mais je ne l'ai pas fait)
Hope this will help you ?


----------



## Wayward

This is a very helpful thread, I have been having a terrible time with this verb.  Merci.


----------



## Aupick

englishman said:
			
		

> Right. Thanks for that - I certainly wasn't aware of the "lack of fulfilment" thing with "devais". Is there any chance you could give a couple of sentences with "je devais" and "j'ai dû" to show the various possible meanings ?


I should have been a little more precise. Since it is an imperfect, "je devais" doesn't say that the duty _wasn't_ fulfilled, but it doesn't say that it was either: it leaves the question open. (Often, though, in practice it _wasn't_.)

"J'ai dû" on the other hand, being a passé composé, clearly states that the duty was fulfilled. 


So sometimes "je devais" is used where the duty has _not_ been fulfilled, sometimes the context suggests that it _was_ fulfilled, and sometimes it's hard to say.

Unfulfilled duty:
- *Je devais* partir avant minuit, mais je suis toujours là.
- *I was supposed to* leave by midnight, but I'm still here.
(*vs*
- Je ne t'ai pas vu parce que *j'ai dû* partir assez tôt.
- I didn't see you because *I had to* leave early.)

Fulfilled duty (fulfilment indicated elsewhere):
- Elle ne *devait* recevoir aucune visite : si la fièvre ne tombait pas, elle était perdue (Simone de Beauvoir).
- She *was not to* receive any visits: if her fever didn't break, she wouldn't make it.

Ambiguity
- Ils m'en ont fait des discours au séminaire pour me décourager [...], *je* *devais* me préparer particulièrement, savoir qui j'étais, et encore il fallait m'éprouver, on verrait ensuite! (Camus)
- They lectured me about it at the seminary to put me off [becoming a missionary] [...], *I would have to/was to* prepare myself carefully, know who I was, and then they would have to test me, and then they would see!

Other examples

Simone de Beauvoir:
- Parmi les gens que *je* *devais* aimer et respecter, il y en avait que, sur certains points, mes parents blâmaient.
- Among those people that *I was supposed to* love and respect, there were some that my parents reproached for certain things.

- Zaza me conduisit dans la chambre que *je* *devais* partager avec elle et Geneviève De Bréville
- Zaza led me into the bedroom that I *was to *share with her and Geneviève De Bréville

Notice the additional translation possibility for "je devais" - I was to.


----------



## larrys13

I don't have the context but why couldn't

Zaza me conduisit dans la chambre que *je* *devais* partager avec elle et Geneviève De Bréville

also be translated as 

Zaza led me into the bedroom that I *was supposed to *share with her and Geneviève De Bréville


----------



## Aupick

larrys13 said:
			
		

> I don't have the context but why couldn't
> 
> Zaza me conduisit dans la chambre que *je* *devais* partager avec elle et Geneviève De Bréville
> 
> also be translated as
> 
> Zaza led me into the bedroom that I *was supposed to *share with her and Geneviève De Bréville


It could. 

(Sorry for not being clearer. I think "was supposed to" can usually replace "was to". I just had a slight preference for "was to" in this case.)


----------



## englishman

Gardefeu said:
			
		

> No, it's _je devrai avoir_.
> _Jeudi prochain,je devrai avoir fini ce travail._



[re: futur anterieur]

I've checked several grammar sources: they all agree with me re: the futur anterieur i.e. for devoir it's "j'aurai dû", which raises the question of what your construction is, as shown above. I would translate this naively as:

"By next tuesaday, I will have to have finished this work"

which is clunky and unpleasant in English. Do French people really say "je devrai avoir" ?


----------



## carolineR

OUI. 
je devrai  futur )+ avoir fini infinitif passé du verbe finir)


----------



## LV4-26

Also note that, while _je devrai avoir _is correct, sometimes used, and not unnatural, in everyday conversation you can also say :
_*Il faut que j'aie fini* ce travail pour mardi._


----------



## englishman

LV4-26 said:
			
		

> Also note that, while _je devrai avoir _is correct, sometimes used, and not unnatural, in everyday conversation you can also say :
> _*Il faut que j'aie fini* ce travail pour mardi._



You say that it is "sometimes used" - does that imply that your alternative is more common ?

And does the first form have a specific name ? I'm pretty certain that it's not the futur antérieur.


----------



## englishman

carolineR said:
			
		

> Recap:
> 
> .. examples deleted
> 
> Hope this will help you ?



CarolineR - yes, thanks very much - those are exactly the sort of examples I was looking for.

Now all I have to do is figure out the subjunctive versions ..


----------



## englishman

Aupick said:
			
		

> Unfulfilled duty:
> - *Je devais* partir avant minuit, mais je suis toujours là.
> - *I was supposed to* leave by midnight, but I'm still here.
> (*vs*
> - Je ne t'ai pas vu parce que *j'ai dû* partir assez tôt.
> - I didn't see you because *I had to* leave early.)



Right. But in the first example, one could equaly well write in English:

"I had to leave by midnight, but I'm still here"

without changing the meaning. 

As for the rest of your "devais" examples: it seems that "devais" can be used in various rather subtle ways, and I'll have to ponder them for a bit. 

BTW, does anyone know of a good French grammar that will cover these kinds of distinctions. I've only ever seen in England the standard A level fare - I guess I need one of the big, thick, standard reference books.


----------



## LV4-26

englishman said:
			
		

> You say that it is "sometimes used" - does that imply that your alternative is more common ?
> 
> And does the first form have a specific name ? I'm pretty certain that it's not the futur antérieur.


 Yes, I think my alternative is more common.
In the first option (and in the second one as well), there are two verbs :  _devoi_r and _finir.
devoir _is in the _futur simple
finir _is in the _infinitif passé.

_While we're at it, in my alternative _falloir_ is in the_ présent_ and _finir_ is in the _subjonctif passé.
_


> Right. But in the first example, one could equaly well write in English:
> "I had to leave by midnight, but I'm still here"


 I'm not a native but I'm surprised by your statement here. Isn't there a slight difference between
_ I was to leave by midnight_ and
_ I had to leave by midnight
_ 
I'd always thought the following. Correct me if I'm wrong.
_I was to leave_ is the expression of a plan. Either it means that I had planned to leave by midnight (in which case it would *not* be strictly equivalent to _I had to_) or that somebody else had planned it for me (in which case, yes, it means the same as _I had to_).

It seems to me that in _I had to_ the sense of obligation is stronger.


----------



## FRENFR

Very close observation, LV4-26. But in general conversation, when someone is telling a story, and they used "had to" and not "was to", we would still get the idea that they left due to a "reason". But yes, was to, has more idea of a plan. I will further add that a slightly more educated person (no comparisons to anyone here) of society might well use the correct form, surrounded with the relative context, whereas not so highly educated, more "street educated" people might say the opposite words. 

"Mum asked me to be back for 12 o'clock, so I went to Steve's party expecting to leave about 1145 but, you know me, I got caught up with a few girls and at 1230 I was still there out the back!" 

"You'll never change, will you!?"

"I know. I had to leave for 12, but those girls kept me there for another half an hour - I couldn't help it!" <-- This sounds great...

...but using "was to leave" feels too weak in this sentence, just as LV4-26 pointed out.

Using "was to leave", in my example, gives the feeling of just visiting the party, and having plans afterwards - such as another party, or meeting someone etc. "I was to leave at 1145 to go and pick up my friend from the airport". That fits nicely. One might use "had to leave" in this example, if one was late for the plane, you see?


----------



## englishman

LV4-26 said:
			
		

> I'm not a native but I'm surprised by your statement here. Isn't there a slight difference between
> _ I was to leave by midnight_ and
> _ I had to leave by midnight
> _
> I'd always thought the following. Correct me if I'm wrong.
> _I was to leave_ is the expression of a plan. Either it means that I had planned to leave by midnight (in which case it would *not* be strictly equivalent to _I had to_) or that somebody else had planned it for me (in which case, yes, it means the same as _I had to_).
> 
> It seems to me that in _I had to_ the sense of obligation is stronger.


1. "was to" is rather formal, correct English, and with the long-term decline in British educational standards, it's less likely that you'll hear it these days.

2. The original sentence was: "I was supposed to leave by midnight", and that is not quite the same as "I was to leave by midnight" (to my mind, anyhow). "I was to" implies, as you suggest, an *external* requirement that he leave by midnight. It suggests that an order has been given:

"You are to leave by midnight" said the policeman, (with the implication being "else you will be arrested", maybe)

This is not equivalent to:

"You are supposed to leave by midnight" said the policeman. Here, the implication can be: "but, if you don't leave by midnight, then it's not a major problem".

3. "I had to" is not necessarily any stronger than "I was to", and is often weaker, since it can imply that the requirement to leave was imposed by the speaker himself, rather than by an external agency.

Bear in mind that we are discussing subtleties here - if you were speaking to someone, you may pick up distinctions in meaning by the precise context, or stress that they place on certain words e.g. compare:

"I _had_ to leave by midnight"
"I had to _leave_ by midnight"
"I had to leave by _midnight"

_I leave the precise distinctions as an exercise for the reader.


----------



## LV4-26

Thanks FRENFR anf Englishman.


----------

