I wonder if it's okay to use these interchangeably:
- You need just accept it.
- You need to just accept it.
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
Need can either be a regular verb, or a modal verb. When need is used as a modal verb, it does not take to. The modal verb is used in current day English mainly in the negative:
It need not have happened.
but I believe that some people also still use need as a modal verb when it is followed by certain adverbs, which would justify the use of "You need just accept it." I also believe that this usage was much more common 100 years ago.
If need is used as a modal verb, it does not get conjugated. Googling "he/she/it need simply" yields quite a few instances of this construction.
No, it's not okay to use these interchangeably. They both work, but it depends on what they precede.
You need a car to get there.
Here, need is followed by a noun, therefore no to.
You need to get there as fast as possible.
Here, need is followed by a verb, therefore a to is required.
Both in one sentence:
You need a car to get there and you need to get there as fast as possible.
In your example, accept is a verb, therefore a simple sentence would look like this:
You need to accept this.
By inserting just, you can extend it to:
You just need to accept this.
Or probably other forms, which should still be correct, but less common:
You need just to accept this.
You need to just accept this.
Either way, to is never ommited, as it was in the first, simplest example.
In conversational American English, you should use an article or "to" following "need".
You need to do this.
You need a new car.
Does he need a pen?
She needs to accept this.
It isn't "wrong" to omit the article or "to", but it is rather uncommon. If you do it you're going to sound like a know-it-all, and risk coming across as very rude.
Update: Case in point, see the comments.
The negative form, "need not" or "needn't", is less pompous but still very formal:
You needn't raise your voice.
A teacher might scold a student in this way.
Saying "need just _" is going to sound unusual and
incomplete haughty to an American audience.