obligations to

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "obligations to" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when discussing responsibilities or duties owed to someone or something. Example: "Employees have obligations to their employers to perform their duties diligently."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Encyclopedias

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

What are our obligations to each other ?

The New York Times - Magazine

"'I've met my obligations to you.

Independent

It's about their obligations to us.

The Guardian - Opinion

But the people who report to him talk about "obligations to leaseholders" and "obligations to bondholders".

The New Yorker

"He has contractual obligations to Nashville," Daly said.

The New York Times

She has no such obligations to a brother.

The New York Times

Corporations have developed hybrid obligations to meet varying circumstances.

Encyclopedia Britannica

Rather, it's about our ethical obligations to animals.

The New York Times

As a husband and father, he has obligations to work.

Independent

"We stand by our obligations to meet all requirements.

The New York Times

"They said they had obligations to their contractors".

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "obligations to", ensure that the recipient of the obligation is clearly defined to avoid ambiguity. For instance, specify "obligations to shareholders" rather than just "obligations".

Common error

Avoid framing personal preferences or desires as "obligations". An obligation implies a duty or requirement, not simply something one wants to do.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "obligations to" functions primarily as a prepositional phrase indicating duties, responsibilities, or commitments owed towards a specific entity. Ludwig AI confirms its correctness and usability, highlighting its role in defining relationships and responsibilities.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

36%

Science

32%

Encyclopedias

6%

Less common in

Formal & Business

6%

Wiki

2%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "obligations to" is a common and grammatically correct way to express duties, responsibilities, or commitments owed to someone or something. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is suitable for various contexts, ranging from formal legal settings to everyday discussions. While alternatives such as "responsibilities towards" and "duties to" exist, "obligations to" remains a versatile choice. Remember to clearly define the recipient of the obligation and avoid confusing genuine obligations with personal preferences to ensure clarity and accuracy in your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

responsibilities towards

Focuses more on the moral or ethical aspect of what is owed.

duties towards

Emphasizes the formal or legal aspect of what is required.

commitments to

Highlights promises or pledges made to someone or something.

responsibilities to

Slightly broader, encompassing a wider range of duties.

accountabilities to

Implies a need to justify actions or outcomes to someone.

liabilities to

More formal and often used in legal or financial contexts.

burdens to

Conveys a sense of weight or difficulty in fulfilling the obligations.

allegiances to

Suggests loyalty and devotion, often in a political or social sense.

moral imperatives towards

Highlights the ethical and moral obligations.

promises made to

Suggests prior commitment has been made.

FAQs

What are some alternative ways to express "obligations to"?

You can use alternatives like "responsibilities towards", "duties towards", or "commitments to" depending on the context.

How does "obligations to" differ from "responsibilities to"?

"Obligations" often imply a legal or formal requirement, while "responsibilities" can encompass broader moral or ethical duties. The choice depends on whether the duty is legally binding or more generally expected.

Is it correct to use "obligations towards" instead of "obligations to"?

While "obligations to" is more common, "obligations towards" is also grammatically correct and can be used. The subtle difference lies in whether you want to emphasize the direction of the obligation (towards) or the recipient (to).

What kind of words should follow "obligations to"?

"Obligations to" is typically followed by a noun or noun phrase indicating the person, group, or entity to whom the obligation is owed. For example, "obligations to employees", "obligations to the environment", or "obligations to the law".