Pragmatically, there doesn't seem to be a difference between the imperative "help me!" and the "ought to" sentence "You ought to help me!" since they both aim at provoking the hearer into the same action. Still, some would argue that there is actually a difference in semantics between these two forms of sentences.
Dear Bassat,
You ask the following: "Is there any semantic difference between an imperative sentence and an "ought to" sentence?"
On the one hand, both setences seem to have the same meaning because they are imperative sentences.
One the other hand, there is a difference between the imperative "help me!" and the imperative "You ought to help me!" As I see it, the latter is more mandatory than the former. The imperative "help me!" reminds me of a favor we are asking for from a given individual, which s/he could or could not to do, whereas the imperative "You ought to help me!"reminds my of a kind of moral obilgation moral one has do fulfill.
Kind regards,
Orando.
Thanks Orlando,
So, in other words, "Help me!" is an entreaty, but "You ought to help me!" is a command?
I had two thoughts. I agree with Orando that 'ought' imports moral categories not contained in the former. If there are any social imperatives in "Help me!", binding one to act, these are not made explicit.
Also, I can imagine "Help me!" being used to trick the hearer. I can't imagine the latter being used in the same way. It seems this is due to the moral standard (whether social, or natural) explicit in the latter -- a standard that is knowable to both the hearer and the speaker.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy