<blockquote>
  <p>你这么成熟懂事,想必一定没人疼你</p>
</blockquote>

<p>想必 draws an inference. 你这么成熟懂事 provides the reasoning. 一定没人疼你 is the  inference. 想必 can be '<strong>presumbly</strong>' in English. You should take 想必 and 一定 separately.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-12T11:34:59.687Z
Can you translate it into english? or is it correct in english?
Voyager
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-12T11:42:02.537Z
@rambler The translation could vary. 想必一定没人疼你:  *presumbly you mustn't be dearly loved.*
dan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-12T11:33:26.317Z
2019-03-12T11:43:48.083Z
2019-03-12T11:43:48.083Z
dan
<p>The meaning can be understood without either 想必 or 一定. But I think using 想必一定 conveys a slightly different nuance from that of either 想必 or 一定.</p>

<p>一定没人疼你: very certain presumption</p>

<p>想必没人疼你: still pretty certain but less so than 一定, and also implies that the speaker has evidence to back his/her view. (since 想必 is usually used with (因为)...想必...)</p>

<p>想必一定没人疼你: conveys both of the connotation above. Very certain and implies that the speaker has evidence.</p>

<p>Therefore, I don't think this is a wrong usage. Consider another case of using two presumption words: 大约的确是死了 (from 《孔乙己》). Neither 大约是死了 nor 的确是死了 can convey the subtle connotation of 大约的确是死了, although 大约 and 的确 seems to be contradicting.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-12T16:47:01.637Z
Yes as in "Yes, the meaning can be understood without either 想必 or 一定". The meaning can be understood without using both, but using both is not wrong.
Ben Yang
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-11T17:02:36.513Z
2019-03-16T01:37:40.047Z
2019-03-16T01:37:40.047Z
Ben Yang
<p>"想必"  short for "想来必定" (think it must be) ; "一定"(certainly) seems redundant to me. </p>

<p>"必一定" is like saying  "certainly" twice</p>

<p>Either "你这么成熟懂事, 想必没人疼你" or "你这么成熟懂事, 我想一定没人疼你" sounds more nature than "你这么成熟懂事, 想必一定没人疼你" (think it must be, certainly)</p>

<p>And yes,  "想必" (think it must be) does mean "presume"; so does "我想一定"</p>

<p>The problem is, if you already said "presumably" then follow it with "certainly" is a logical contradiction</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-11T15:00:42.917Z
2019-03-11T15:08:43.957Z
2019-03-11T15:08:43.957Z
Tang Ho
<p>Defination of "想必" :</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>[presumably; most probably] 表示比较肯定的判断、猜测</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I think you are right. "想必一定" is not an accurate use. "想必" is still guessing, while "一定" is making assertion.</p>

<p>Either "你这么成熟懂事,想必没人疼你" or "你这么成熟懂事,一定没人疼你" is more correct.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-18T02:54:22.200Z
2019-03-18T02:54:22.200Z
Wei Huang
<p>There are <strong>many</strong> example sentences (763,000). Such as <code>你这么成熟懂事,想必一定没人疼你</code>.</p>

<p>Intuitively I think it's fluent.</p>

<p>But think carefully, 想必 means "presumably, most probably," is this wrong?</p>

<phrase><idioms>
Is 想必一定 a wrong usage?
# Is 想必一定 a wrong usage?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-03-11)

There are **many** example sentences (763,000). Such as `你这么成熟懂事,想必一定没人疼你`.

Intuitively I think it's fluent.

But think carefully, 想必 means "presumably, most probably," is this wrong?

**Tags:** phrase, idioms

---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2019-03-12. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

> 你这么成熟懂事,想必一定没人疼你

想必 draws an inference. 你这么成熟懂事 provides the reasoning. 一定没人疼你 is the inference. 想必 can be '**presumbly**' in English. You should take 想必 and 一定 separately.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Can you translate it into english? or is it correct in english?  
> **username_1**: @rambler The translation could vary. 想必一定没人疼你:  *presumbly you mustn't be dearly loved.*  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-03-11. Score: 3

The meaning can be understood without either 想必 or 一定. But I think using 想必一定 conveys a slightly different nuance from that of either 想必 or 一定.

一定没人疼你: very certain presumption

想必没人疼你: still pretty certain but less so than 一定, and also implies that the speaker has evidence to back his/her view. (since 想必 is usually used with (因为)...想必...)

想必一定没人疼你: conveys both of the connotation above. Very certain and implies that the speaker has evidence.

Therefore, I don't think this is a wrong usage. Consider another case of using two presumption words: 大约的确是死了 (from 《孔乙己》). Neither 大约是死了 nor 的确是死了 can convey the subtle connotation of 大约的确是死了, although 大约 and 的确 seems to be contradicting.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Yes as in "Yes, the meaning can be understood without either 想必 or 一定". The meaning can be understood without using both, but using both is not wrong.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2019-03-11. Score: 0

"想必" short for "想来必定" (think it must be) ; "一定"(certainly) seems redundant to me.

"必一定" is like saying "certainly" twice

Either "你这么成熟懂事, 想必没人疼你" or "你这么成熟懂事, 我想一定没人疼你" sounds more nature than "你这么成熟懂事, 想必一定没人疼你" (think it must be, certainly)

And yes, "想必" (think it must be) does mean "presume"; so does "我想一定"

The problem is, if you already said "presumably" then follow it with "certainly" is a logical contradiction


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2019-03-18. Score: 0

Defination of "想必" :

> [presumably; most probably] 表示比较肯定的判断、猜测

I think you are right. "想必一定" is not an accurate use. "想必" is still guessing, while "一定" is making assertion.

Either "你这么成熟懂事,想必没人疼你" or "你这么成熟懂事,一定没人疼你" is more correct.


---

