ought not to do or ought not do

Question

There are two sources, which contradict each other.

Notice "Ought not" Remember that "ought to" loses the "to" in the negative. Instead of "ought not to," we say "ought not."

You say that someone ought not to do something: She ought not to go.

You can also use oughtn’t: She oughtn’t to go.

So, what is correct: ought not to do or ought not do?

Yes, it seems that there are a lot of sources insisting on "ought not to do" variant... — DimanNe, Commented Mar 11, 2017 at 11:22
No no, my mistake. American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style says, the to is sometimes omitted, but it's not commom in writing. So, I think it's fine :) — Mohd Zulkanien Sarbini, Commented Mar 11, 2017 at 11:31
So, do you mean that it is just an British vs American difference in usage of ought? — DimanNe, Commented Mar 11, 2017 at 11:35
According to NGram, the former isn't widely used in both AmE and BrE — Mohd Zulkanien Sarbini, Commented Mar 11, 2017 at 11:42

Mohd Zulkanien Sarbini · Accepted Answer · 2017-03-11 13:57:07Z

1

The "to" in ought not to is optional in informal non-assertive context, which is particularly associated with negation.

But it's more natural to say She oughtn't to go or just use should, she shouldn't go.

New Fowlers Modern English Usage

answered Mar 11, 2017 at 13:17

8,8646 gold badges35 silver badges64 bronze badges

Add a comment |

1 Answer 1