13

What is the difference between shouldn't have done something and needn't have done something?

Everything was okay. You needn't have worried.

Can we say you shouldn't have worried instead of needn't ... ?

  • 5
    In general, shouldn't have done something has a slightly negative ring to it. It sounds like you are lightly reprimanding someone for doing something. Needn't sounds more like you really did not need to and it was just completely unnecessary for you to have done what you did. But with the context you provided in your example sentence, you can just use either expression. – Phil14 Jun 15 '17 at 7:08
  • 5
    "Shouldn't X" means "X is bad", and "needn't X" means "either X or not X are fine". – Meni Rosenfeld Jun 15 '17 at 15:42
28

In general, "should not" and "need not" have significantly different meanings.

"Should not" indicates that it is bad to do a particular thing. For example, you should not drive a car too fast, because driving too fast is dangerous.

"Need not" indicates that it is not bad not to do a particular thing (in other words, the thing is unnecessary). For example, before you get in a car and drive it, you need not look inside the fuel tank to see if there is fuel there, because the car has a fuel gauge which tells you whether or not there is fuel. However, it is still okay to look inside the fuel tank if you want.

A synonym of "need not" is "don't need to". Examples: "you don't need to turn on the headlights", "you didn't need to worry".

If you say "you shouldn't have worried", then what you are saying is "worrying was a bad thing to do", and that may be a little bit rude to say. It would probably be better to say "you needn't have worried" (or "you didn't need to worry").

  • 3
    Can you use another example than headlights please? If you don't have daytime running lights in Switzerland, it is a criminal offence not to turn on your headlights during the day. (But I strongly agree with your answer apart from that.) – Martin Bonner supports Monica Jun 15 '17 at 12:14
  • 2
    I've changed the example to talk about looking inside the fuel tank instead of turning on the headlights during the day. (This is off-topic, but before you fly a small airplane, you should check the fuel tanks manually to verify that you have enough fuel, even though airplanes have fuel gauges too. This is because running out of fuel in an airplane is extremely dangerous!) – Tanner Swett Jun 15 '17 at 14:40
  • 1
    Also "needn't" sounds a bit archaic (but still totally understandable). "Don't need to" is much more natural. – BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft Jun 15 '17 at 15:48
  • 1
    "You shouldn't have speeded" (because now you have a ticket) - "You needn't have speeded" (because we have plenty of time and now you're early) – freedomn-m Jun 16 '17 at 8:20
  • 1
    Your general analysis of "should not" and "need not" is 100% correct. However your last paragraph about this particular situation is completely wrong; in this situation they have the same meaning. – AndyT Jun 16 '17 at 11:17
5

As Phil14 mentions in his comment, "you shouldn't have ..." has a note of reprimand, but this can vary with context:

You shouldn't have brought donuts, I'm on a diet.

(mild reprimand, equivalent to "I wish you hadn't done that")

Hey, you brought donuts! You shouldn't have!

(zero reprimand, equivalent to "Thanks!")

"You needn't have" can also indicate disapproval, but to a lesser degree. As P. E. Dant mentions in his comment, it can sound archaic or overly polite to some, but that shouldn't stop you from using it.

  • 1
    As this indicates, words and phrases often convey thoughts quite different from their literal meanings. For example, while looking for a parking space I find a car parked across two spaces and say, "What a considerate driver!" What I really mean is, "What a jerk!" – David K Jun 16 '17 at 13:40
4

This is fairly confusing in that "should not do" and "need not do" are not equivalent negations of "should" and "need".

"Need not do" is as you would expect, the opposite of "need to do" - "not need to do". These things are the opposite of a requirement and are therefore optional.

However "should not do" is much closer to a positive requirement ("should") to "not do" something. In either case, "should" or "should not", there is an obligation relating to a verb.

"You need not walk in the road" - but you can if you like
"You should not walk in the road" - so don't

All of the above applies equally to the future perfect "should not have" and "need not have".

2

I think there is a little difference between them.

1) You shouldn't have worried.

It means that there were some reasons to worry but those weren't enough.

2) You needn't have worried.

It means that it was just unnecessary to worry.

1

shouldn't have done can have meanings along a spectrum or gradient from

it was wrong or a bad idea to do it

to

you were under no obligation to do it

and the same is true for needn't have done whose meanings extend from

there was no compelling reason to do it

to

you were under no obligation to do it

So you can see that there is overlap between the two words.

We brought you some flowers to welcome you back.
-- That was very nice of you, but you needn't|shouldn't have done that.

Nobody wanted the kittens so I drowned them in a sack.
-- You needn't|shouldn't have done that. I'm sure if we had waited a little longer, we would have found homes for them.

-4

Technically they are the same in meaning, the differences are only in the context.

With that said, I should add that in my experience "you should not have done" often also means that what you've done was a mistake, you've done something wrong or the speaker is mad at you.
On the other hand "you need not have done" is more "gentle", it doesn't really convey that negative meaning unless of course the context has it. And I should point out that some people consider the usage of the verb need as a modal verb archaic or even incorrect, and often non-native speakers (usually who learned BrE) may not even understand it.

  • 3
    I disagree. If I pick up a piece of paper lying on the ground, and throw it on a bonfire, someone might say "you didn't need to do that" (meaning it was unnecessary). If it was a piece of paper that someone was writing on, they are more likely to say "you shouldn't have done that" (meaning it was actively wrong to do it). – Martin Bonner supports Monica Jun 15 '17 at 12:16
  • 5
    -1 They are not the same meaning even theortically. "You shouldn't have gone to the party," and "You needn't have gone to the party" have significantly different meaning. – DRF Jun 15 '17 at 12:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.