Obligation Kelas 10 SMK

Summary

This video tutorial explains the differences between the English modals 'have to,' 'has to,' and 'should' in expressing obligation. The host highlights how 'have to' and 'has to' denote absolute obligations, while 'should' represents a more flexible or optional obligation. Through practical examples, viewers learn how to use these modals in various contexts, such as in daily activities or formal situations. The video also emphasizes the importance of understanding when each modal is appropriate, offering a simple yet clear guide for learners to grasp the concept of obligation in English.

Takeaways

• 😀 Understanding 'Have to' and 'Must' indicates a strong obligation, something that absolutely needs to be done.
• 😀 'Should' is a softer obligation or suggestion, meaning it's advisable but not necessary.
• 😀 The main difference between 'Have to' / 'Must' and 'Should' is the strength of the obligation: 100% versus 50%.
• 😀 Example of 'Have to': 'When the traffic light is red, you have to stop.' It's a non-negotiable action.
• 😀 Example of 'Have to' in another context: 'We have to go to the airport before 7.' Missing this obligation has consequences.
• 😀 'Must' is used for the same kind of strong obligation as 'Have to,' emphasizing that there is no choice.
• 😀 Example of 'Should': 'You look tired; you should rest.' It suggests rest, but it's not a compulsory action.
• 😀 Use 'Have to' or 'Must' for things that cannot be avoided, while 'Should' provides an option.
• 😀 Both 'Have to' and 'Must' suggest an obligation with no room for alternatives or exceptions.
• 😀 When expressing a weaker obligation or suggestion, 'Should' is appropriate, but the action is not required.

Q & A

What is the main topic of the video?

The main topic of the video is understanding the concept of 'obligation' in English, specifically focusing on the differences between the phrases 'have to' and 'should.'

What does the phrase 'have to' indicate in terms of obligation?

'Have to' indicates a 100% obligation, meaning something must be done without any choice or option.

How does 'should' differ from 'have to' in terms of obligation?

'Should' suggests a 50% obligation, meaning it is a recommendation or advice, but not an absolute requirement, allowing for a choice.

Can you provide an example where 'have to' is used correctly?

An example would be: 'When the traffic light is red, you have to stop.' This shows a clear, non-negotiable obligation.

What is an example of using 'should' in a sentence?

An example would be: 'You should rest if you feel tired.' This suggests a recommendation but is not a strict requirement.

In the video, what consequence is mentioned if the 'have to' obligation is not followed?

If the 'have to' obligation is not followed, the consequence could be missing something important, such as a flight, as mentioned in the example 'We have to go to the airport before 7 AM, or we'll miss the flight.'

What is the significance of using 'have to' in the sentence about going to the airport?

The use of 'have to' in the sentence 'We have to go to the airport before 7 AM' emphasizes that it is a strict requirement with no choice, highlighting the necessity to avoid missing the flight.

What example does the video provide for using 'should'?

The video provides the example 'You look tired, you should rest.' This implies a suggestion, giving the listener the option to rest but not demanding it.

How does the speaker define the term 'obligation' in the context of this video?

The speaker defines 'obligation' as something that must be done, with 'have to' expressing a 100% obligation (must be done), while 'should' represents a 50% obligation (optional but recommended).

What is the conclusion the speaker offers regarding the use of 'have to' and 'should'?

The speaker concludes that 'have to' or 'must' should be used for situations that are absolutely required, while 'should' is appropriate for situations where there is a choice or recommendation, not an absolute requirement.