Why is “have to” attached?

There’s not much practical difference in meaning, but it implies that you’re listening to things people *want to* say, not just listening to them talk. “I have something to say” means “I want to say something” and implies it’s something important to you - you have a genuine desire to say this thing and have other people hear it. You feel your opinion or contribution is meaningful, and want to share it. So “listening to what people say” is more neutral: they speak, you listen. “Listening to what people have to say” makes it more meaningful, you are validating their desire to share their thoughts/opinions.

It's hard to describe, to be honest. I've just been googling and general consensus seems to be that "has to say" "have to say" etc convey more opinion statements than just "said" or "say". Not that this is not an imperative or obligation to say something. It's *not* necessary to say. That's not what "have" is doing here.

what people have to say is more about listening to what opinions and insights they possess which they could say, whereas what people say is more just focussed on the person it’s not as much listening to what they actually have that they could then say out loud

I find that adding the ”have to” emphasizes the potential value of the thoughts that the people might say. That being said though, I find both to be basically the same

Remember that "have" is also it's own verb! "(Have to) say" ≠ "have (to say)" (Have to) say = something that must be said Have (to say) = something that someone wants to say

Essentially, it's the same as "what other people want to say" or "what other people are in a position to say."

I would interpret ‘have’ here as /hæv/ and not /hæf/, so it would have the meaning of possession (like “other people’s things to say”) and not imperative (like “what other people must say”).

It's not have to + stat but have + to say You're listening to what people have + to say.

I agree with your instincts here. This sentence feels lopsided and your intuition to question it here is spot on. The more natural and logically connected construction in my mind would be better balanced if the vague and generalised idea of reading books, all books on any topic imaginable, was measured against what people say generally, about any topic imaginable. Conversely, I would expect to see what people have to say, about a certain topic or cluster of topics, measured against reading a book, the book that is about a certain topic or cluster of topics. So perhaps it is our shared sense of/ preference for logical balance that leads to your question, rather than any obvious error. This is very much an intuitive sense of using logically matching language, not an issue of correctness.

I guess it's because when people "have to" say something, the message likely has its importance.

Think of it this way - if a person has something to say, they literally _have_, or _possess_ ideas in their mind that that want to communicate. "I have something to say" is kind of the same as saying "There is a sentence in my head, I've rehearsed it, I can practically hear it in my mind, I can repeat it aloud, and I will. So, here I go."

this use of "have" is in the sense of ownership and implies concreteness of something that can be owned, it's like the difference between "what people say" and "what words people say". practically speaking there's not much difference, and many would just use them interchangeably and not think about it. but there's a little nuance that it's the words that someone wants to convey vs the act of saying. neither is wrong, it's just a slightly nuanced additional way of saying things. incidently this nuance is completely irrelevant to the japanese grammar point.

What other people have, *to say* To say is the to form of the word say, like *I am, you are, to be.*

It's kind of a shorthand for "opinions and thoughts that people want to share with us by speaking". Those opinions etc. are things that they "have" in their minds and they want "to say" them. This shouldn't be confused with "have to" as in "must".

Have means possess, in this case. I have something to say = I have a thought that I want to express. What I [have] [to say] is…

"What people say" generally refers to the actual words that come out of their mouths. "What people have to say" is more conceptual, the broader message taking their words with additional context. Think of it like, "What people have (inside their heart/mind) to express" rather than "have to say" as in "must say."

I always thought it wasn’t HAVE TO and SAY, but rather HAVE and TO SAY. As in, they “have something to say”

"what other people say" -- the words that are literally spoken by other people. "what other people have to say " -- This can include ideas or opinions that people *might* say but aren't saying yet because the conditions aren't right (nobody's listening, too busy, too nervous to talk about a topic, etc.) E.g., "He has a lot to say about that." could mean several things, including: * He is very knowledgeable about that topic. * He just has very strong opinions about that topic.

The person has a statement. The statement is designated for sharing. They have something to say.

This phrasing is often used to get someone's opinions, not necessarily something they are already saying. "To have" in this case is using the "to possess" definition, and not "have to" as in "must". So the person (or people) in question possess something they might want to say, or you might want to know. Eg. If you ask your mom if you can stay out past curfew, she might say "Let's see what your Dad has to say about it first". Or politicians often conduct surveys to see what their voters *have to say* about important issues.

Have to say is about an unspoken idea. It can be used in a few contexts, and is subtly different from just say. "My supervisor never listens to what I have to say. He just dismisses my ideas." In this case, the supervisor might actually hear the spoken words, but it's not open to the ideas. It doesn't only have to be about speaking - it can be any way that ideas are expressed: "I didn't read the book because I'm not interested in what the author has to say." This means that I do not care about the authors ideas, so I don't want to read them. It can also be used when someone hasn't said something they want to say ( or are reluctant to say). For example, maybe someone in your class is shy, and the teacher wants to encourage them to speak their idea, they might say "Amy,, do you have something you would like to say?" * note you can remove the "would like." It makes it more polite. Just saying " Do you have something to say" comes off as a little bit direct, almost confrontational. The same phrase can be used shamefully as well. Mother tells a boy he cannot have cookies before dinner. Father catches boy taking a cookie. Father brings the boy to mother: "Bobby, do you have something to say to your mother?" The boy has an unspoken confession that the father want him to say. Tl;dr. Have (something) to say is about unexpressed ideas.

Note this is "have" in the sense of "own" or "possess", not as in "need" or "require".

I just realized this,  Wrong: other people have to say something Correct: other people have something to say Is this right?

I assume you're Japanese? If so, I'll explain in Japanese just in case the English explanations are a little tough. 「~have to say」とは「言いたいこと」または「話」や「意見」、頭の中にいて個人的な言うことというニュアンスがあります。この言い回しでは自分や他人の言うことを重要とされています。 和訳にも書いてある通り、「Listening to what other people have to say」とは「人の話を聞くのは～」となるのに対し、「Listening to what other people say」とは「他人の言うことを聞くのは～」という意味になります。

"Have to" as in "offering up", not "forced to".  So like "Do you have anything to share with us." "I have some cookies to share." "Do you have anything to say?" "I don't have anything to say."

Note that this is not "have to" in the sense of "must", but in the sense of "having something to say" which essentially means that someone has an opinion or input that they would like to share. So, listening to what other people *have to say* isn't just hearing whatever might come out of their mouths, it is about hearing and acknowledging a person's opinions and ideas.

I always thought about it metaphorically. Like they don't just say, they "have" things that they can say. It makes you feel that their thoughts are more material

To have (sth) to say = want to communicate something. “He has a lot to say about this subject” - he communicates a lot about it. In this case, the verb phrase “other people have to say” is part of a noun phrase that is the subject of the sentence: “Listening to what other people have to say” (subject)

"Have to" can usually be substituted with "must." But in this case it means something more subtle than that. Think of it as modifying the statement to say something more like "Listening to other people's opinions is more important than reading books."