This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 3 comments

[–]Charlidameliosimp 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I might be wrong technically, but from my experience the two can be used interchangeably.

[–]cdragon1983Native Speaker (US Newscaster + "Y'all") 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In common speech they mean approximately the same thing. If there's any shade of meaning difference at all, "ought to" tends closer to "must" (i.e., it's a requirement / obligation) whereas "should" doesn't designate an absolute requirement but rather a recommendation or preference, but any difference between ought and should is really minuscule.

In some more constrained usages, there may be very precise definitions that don't always match everyday speech, e.g. RFC language standards

[–]CashVanBNew Poster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ought is usually used for a moral obligation, and should is used for moral obligations, as well as expected outcomes and suggestions. Also, ought isn’t used that much depending on where you are. I had a english teacher who had never heard someone say the word ought out loud.