Greek to Hindi: an obligation is different from a desire to act
Greek must should not become Hindi want
Greek πρέπει can introduce a requirement concerning an action. Hindi चाहिए and चाहना look related in transliteration and spelling, but they do not express the same meaning or use the same participant construction. A translation can preserve the action while still changing an obligation into a personal wish if it confuses them.
The Greek overview identifies πρέπει as an impersonal must expression and describes να clauses functioning as verb arguments. A sentence such as the original Πρέπει να φύγω concerns a requirement for the speaker to leave. It does not by itself say that the speaker wants the departure. The person who must act and their attitude toward the action are separate information.
Snell explicitly contrasts Hindi चाहिए with चाहना. His example distinguishes I should go from I do not want to go, using a ko-marked experiencer for the requirement and a different subject construction for wanting. The two claims can be true together, so one cannot replace the other merely because both involve a future journey.
The person under the requirement may have a different grammatical form
The Hindi phrase मुझे जाना चाहिए illustrates a requirement concerning the speaker’s going. Its मुझे should not be mistaken for a recipient who is being sent somewhere by another unstated actor. The construction identifies the person under the requirement. A Greek source with a first-person action must remain first person in meaning even when the target does not use its ordinary nominative I form.
Compare two original messages: I should call today, and I want to call today. The first can arise from a responsibility or practical need; the second reports a desire. If the Greek passage uses a requirement construction, translating only the wish leaves the reader unsure whether the call is expected. If it reports a wish, translating an obligation adds pressure absent from the source.
Snell also distinguishes constructions with होना or पड़ना, describing the latter as a stronger kind of compulsion in its account. This prevents a second shortcut: treating every Greek πρέπει as a command to choose the strongest available Hindi necessity expression. The surrounding requirement matters. A scheduling necessity, an external obligation, and advice can share a broad English must or should explanation while differing in force.
An object can affect the Hindi construction as well. Snell’s example of needing to speak Hindi has agreement associated with the object, while a ko-marked object leads to a different pattern in the discussion. A target feminine form in such an example does not automatically identify a female speaker. Keep the person who must act distinct from the noun naming what the action concerns.
For a Greek instruction or personal plan, identify the required action, the person subject to the requirement, and whether the source separately expresses willingness. Then choose the Hindi requirement or desire construction appropriate to those meanings. This preserves the useful possibility that somebody must do something they do not want to do, instead of merging both parts of the message into one vague future intention.
Language references