Translation:We must improve the communication at the office.
It was already accepted, but a lot of people had reported versions with need instead of must or have to, and that was not accepted. (The machine will sometimes mark the wrong part of the sentence as an error). I have however added it now. In Swedish, there is a pretty big difference between måste (must, have to) and behöver (need), but it seems that this difference has disappeared from modern English, at least American English.
måste stands for obligation and behöver stands for necessity. The same has been true for the English words must and need historically, (many dictionaries still reflect this difference) but apparently this important distinction has been lost.
Isn't it odd? Normally I am keen to see and perpetuate the different nuances of words, but for over 70 years in England I have regarded "must" and "need to" as being synonyms, simply because I have only ever heard them used as synonyms. Even now, I'm not sure I can grasp the distinction. It seems to be blurring two ideas that aren't so different anyway - unlike, say "alternate" in American being used both to mean "alternate" and "alternative", which are two totally different concepts.
It's fascinating. To be honest I would have thought someone like you would have upheld this distinction (you do understand the difference between necessity and obligation as abstract words, I assume) but since you don't, I guess it must be all but extinct even in England.
When I started contributing to this course (was it 2 years ago?) I felt that this distinction was crystal clear to me in Swedish, but the longer I've been working on the course, the more blurred the distinction has become for me too. So my guess is that it won't be long until no one can tell the difference here either. It'll be interesting to see how this works out in the Swedish for Russian course.