7

I've written the following in a sentence, but now that I look at it, I'm doubting my grammatical instincts and wanted to get a second opinion.

...the balance need be swayed only slightly...

Is the use of "need be" here correct? I read this as essentially identical to:

...the balance needs to be swayed only slightly...

but I haven't been able to find any other written uses of the first syntax. Formal references for this usage would be appreciated, but more general comments are of course welcome. Thanks!

Improve this question
5
  • 3
    It is difficult to tell because you have not given complete sentences. Grammar depends partly on context.
    – chasly - supports Monica
    Commented Oct 20, 2015 at 21:42
  • I can hardly say the word need be used, since that's 395 written instances without it. But Google Books claims to have 1,140 instances pointing out that the word needs to be used. Without to, it seems rather dated to me.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Oct 20, 2015 at 21:44
  • If you inflect to needs, it is no longer a modal so needs the to. If you do not, it does not.
    – tchrist ♦
    Commented Oct 21, 2015 at 2:55
  • @tchrist Basically you are saying that "It needs be" is incorrect, but "It need be" or "It needs to be" are correct?
    – odalet
    Commented Jul 19, 2020 at 12:15
  • It is correct. The "only slightly" provides a negative context, which in turn licenses a negative polarity item. "Need" in the syntax shown here is a negative polarity item. The reader mystified by this jargon need only consult this answer to a question. I've accordingly voted to close this Q as being a dup of that Q.
    – Rosie F
    Commented Jun 7 at 8:41

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
11

Both are fine. Need, like dare, is sometimes called a "semi-modal", in that it can be used like modals (eg can, may) but can also be used as a normal verb (eg like want).

So The balance need be swayed only slightly is parallel to The balance can be swayed only slightly (the meaning is different - this is just showing the syntax); whereas The balance needs to be swayed only slightly is parallel to The balance requires to be swayed only slightly.

I believe that the modal use is becoming less common, and I suspect it is altogether less common in US English than in UK, but I'm not sure about that.

Improve this answer
2
  • Excellent point, my mind automatically jumped to the idiomatic usage. That being said, "need be" denotes necessity and "can be" denotes either limit or option, no? That is, doesn't the usage "need be" express that "the necessary 'amount of sway' that the balance requires is 'slight'"; whereas the usage "can be" expresses that "the degree to which it is possible to 'sway the balance' is 'slight'"? That is, the first formulation tells us what is the threshold and the second formulation tells us what is the limit.
    – moismailzai
    Commented Oct 21, 2015 at 0:34
  • 1
    Sure. I was using can be only as a syntactic parallel: I didn't mean to suggest that it was similar in meaning. I'll edit to show this.
    – Colin Fine
    Commented Oct 22, 2015 at 22:55
-1

In "it needs to be....." / "it need to be......" need is used as a verb not as a modal auxiliary. Because, with no modal auxiliary we use "to be", right?

So, it should be "it needs to be...."always which means "needs" here is the s form of NEED.

Improve this answer
-1

...the balance need be swayed only slightly...

“Need” is subjunctive:

“Defeat is not certain: The balance need be swayed only slightly and we are victorious.”

Compare “Were/Be the balance swayed only slightly, we are victorious.”

Whereas:

...the balance needs to be swayed only slightly...

“Need” is indicative.

"If the battle is to be won, the balance needs to be swayed only slightly."

Improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .