Comparison between need+to vs need+to+be

new_english   Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:00 am GMT
I found the following sentence in a website:

---"I need to be playing games week in and week out," the midfielder says.---

My question is that what's the difference between "need+to+verb" vs "need+to+be+verb+ing" like in the sentence above? I mean, is there any difference between the two forms?

Thank you
new_english   Wed Feb 14, 2007 2:38 am GMT
Hello everyone?

I am waiting for your comments here....
Lazar   Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:07 am GMT
"Need to be [x]ing" emphasizes the progressive or stative aspect of the verb; in other words, the player feels as if he needs to be in a constant state of "game-playing" throughout the week.

Compared with "need to [x]", the difference in meaning isn't really very big. I think "need to be [x]ing" sounds more informal.
new_english   Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:05 am GMT
In other words, a native speaker will understand well when talking with a non native speaker when the non native speaker just say "I need to play games week in and week out".

Lazar   Wed Feb 14, 2007 9:47 am GMT
Yes, they would understand.
new_english   Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:17 am GMT
How about this one:

"I need to be going to my grandmother's house tomorrow"

Is it common to say something like the one above?
Lazar   Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:30 am GMT
Well, "I need to be going" is common in vernacular speech, but I think it doesn't really fit in the example you give. I think "I need to be going" is most commonly used by someone as an explanation of why they are leaving at that very moment. If you're going tomorrow, then I think it sounds more natural to say, "I need to go to my grandmother's house tomorrow."