Learn English – Should the verb “impact” be always followed by “on”

I've heard the "needs washed" construction so many times that it sounds completely normal to me.

Your other three examples, however, don't sound familiar.

I'm having a tough time thinking of a set rule for dropping "to be." I think it could work with want in addition to need, e.g. "The baby wants changed." But I can't think of other verbs that it would work with.

Edit: I actively use this construction. I was just telling my roommate the other day that "That lightbulb needs changed," and he understood me because he grew up in south central Pennsylvania, too.

I know it works with need, and I'm pretty sure it can work with want, too. (E.g., The dog wants fed.)

I'm heading back to my hometown this weekend, so I'll try to remember to ask people while I'm there. But it's kind of hard to talk about this sort of thing with people who've spoken that way their whole life and don't even know that other people talk differently. A lot of folks I know from there don't understand that most people would find the following very grating: "We're going to the mall. Do you want to come with?"

Update: I polled a few friends while I was back in Pennsylvania Dutch Country. They confirmed the construction with needs and wants, but they couldn't think of any other verbs it could work with.

You certainly can follow hallucinating with a preposition, but I don't think any well describes the relationship between the hallucinations and the wallpaper in that story.

She was hallucinating a woman in the wallpaper.

She was having hallucinations, projected on to the wallpaper.

The wallpaper became the focus of her hallucinations.

I would all be happy with.

She saw hallucinations in the wallpaper.

I would also be happy with.

I'm inclined to the first, but that's partly because I think the fact that the hallucination was of a woman is itself significant in my reading of that story. You may disagree, or it may be irrelevant to your piece.