Need expresses necessity. It is mostly used in negative and interrogative sentences. You needn’t be in such a fright. Take my arm. (Shaw) NOTE: When need is used in the meaning of ‘to be in want of’ it is treated as a normal verb. e.g. He needs a new pair of shoes. Need has only one tense form — the Present. In the same way as dare, need is used as a normal and as an anomalous verb; the latter is much more common in colloquial English. One need to be careful. (Zandvoort) He did not need to be told twice. (Zandvoort) Why [...]

Dare means ‘to have the courage (or impertinence) to do something’. In the negative, it denotes the lack of courage to do something. “How dare you ask the little Kelveys into the courtyard,” said her cold, furious voice. (Mansfield)  The verb dare as well as need has some peculiarities which make it different from other modal verbs. It is used both as a normal verb (taking the auxiliary do in the interrogative and negative forms, - s in the third person singular, and the to-Infinitive) and as an anomalous verb (without any auxiliary in its interrogative and negative forms, [...]

Would was originally the past tense of will in the same way as should was the past tense of shall. But while the latter has acquired new shades of meaning, would has preserved those of will. Thus it expresses volition, and persistence referring to the past. #1. Volition. In this meaning, it is mostly used in negative sentences. She was going away and would not say where she was going. (Dreiser) #2. Persistence. I asked him not to bang the door, but he would do it. Several times Eckerman tried to get away, but Goethe would not let him [...]

Will is hardly ever a purely modal verb. It generally combines its modal meaning with the function of an auxiliary expressing futurity. The modal verb will expresses volition, intention on the part of the speaker, or insistence. #1. Volition, intention. In most cases, this meaning is rendered in Russian by emphatic intonation, but sometimes the verb хотеть is used. It is used with all persons but mostly with the first person. “What is this? Who is this? Turn this man out. Clear the office!” cried Mr. Fang. “I will speak,” cried the man. “I will not be turned out...” [...]

Shall is never a purely modal verb. It always combines its modal meaning with the function of an auxiliary expressing futurity. It expresses determination on the part of the speaker, i. e. compulsion or order, threat or warning, or promise. As a rule, shall as a modal verb is not translated into Russian, its meaning is rendered by emphatic intonation. #1. Compulsion or strict order. In this meaning, it is always used with the second and third persons and has strong stress. Paula: I’ve got to tell Mr. Tanqueray. Hugh: By God, you shall do nothing of the sort. [...]

The modal expression to have + Infinitive is used in three tense forms: the Present Indefinite, the Past Indefinite, and the Future Indefinite. I have to get up at six every day. When water was rushing through the tents and everybody had to sleep in wet blankets, it was treated as a joke. (Prichard) I shall have to take the pupils into the hills, as usual, and see them settled there. (Voynich) The negative and interrogative forms of this modal expression are formed with the help of the auxiliary do.  Did you have to walk all the way home? [...]

То be + Infinitive is a modal expression. Some of its meanings are close to those of modal verbs and expressions denoting obligation (must, shall, should, ought, to have + Infinitive). This modal expression can be used in two tenses — the Present Indefinite and the Past Indefinite (was, were). Dear Jim, I am to be shot at sunrise tomorrow. (Voynich) They were to go to Spain for the honeymoon. (Galsworthy) To be + Infinitive expresses a weakened order, an arrangement, possibility, or something thought of as unavoidable. The ways of rendering this expression in Russian differ in accordance with [...]

Should was originally the past tense of shall, but it has acquired new shades of meaning in the course of its development. The modal verbs should and ought are treated together here as there is hardly any difference between them. Very often they are interchangeable. I ought to have married; yes, I should have married long ago. (Poittsma) There is, however, a difference in construction. Whereas should is followed by the infinitive without the particle to, ought is always followed by the to-infinitive. When reference is made to the present or future, the Indefinite Infinitive is used. In wartime [...]