The signs were all there
Oct. 28th, 2009 01:29 pmSome years ago, there was a snippet in the back of Private Eye where someone pointed out the hilarious sign on the M40 which read "Use both lanes Oxford A34".
How could one, they said (presumably with sides splitting from the laughter) use both lanes. Surely the sign should advise you to use either lane for Oxford?
Now, while acknowledging that they are technically correct, I'd driven past that sign for years without batting an eyelid. It uses short words and it's easy to understand what it intends to convey, which is pretty much the main criterion for a sensible motorway sign.
When small, I was perpetually amused by the roadworks signs which advise you "Delays possible til October". But it's July, I don't want to be stuck in a queue for three months! I do, however, concede that the sign can't really be improved on; you can't be accurate in four words or fewer. Ditto "Police Slow" signs (I'm a civilian, I can go as fast as I want!) I suppose you could stick a colon in that one, but really only the most perverse alien would genuinely misunderstand it.
Making signs say exactly what they mean would ultimately degenerate into huge hoardings containing several paragraphs of legalese; not a great idea for drivers hurtling by and trying to absorb information at 70mph.
However, every so often I do observe a sign which seems so peculiar that I want to know the backstory. If, for example you saw the following sign, do you think you'd understand it?
Assuming you were a passenger who wished to change floors without climbing stairs, you'd get the general idea that walking the way the little symbol-thing pointed might be a good idea?
So, I want to know what humorous misunderstandings and mishaps led to the placement of the following sign in Reading railway station:
Having added all those extra words, they could have added a 'For' at the front, which would have corrected the only possible ambiguity I can see in my alternative version above.
How could one, they said (presumably with sides splitting from the laughter) use both lanes. Surely the sign should advise you to use either lane for Oxford?
Now, while acknowledging that they are technically correct, I'd driven past that sign for years without batting an eyelid. It uses short words and it's easy to understand what it intends to convey, which is pretty much the main criterion for a sensible motorway sign.
When small, I was perpetually amused by the roadworks signs which advise you "Delays possible til October". But it's July, I don't want to be stuck in a queue for three months! I do, however, concede that the sign can't really be improved on; you can't be accurate in four words or fewer. Ditto "Police Slow" signs (I'm a civilian, I can go as fast as I want!) I suppose you could stick a colon in that one, but really only the most perverse alien would genuinely misunderstand it.
Making signs say exactly what they mean would ultimately degenerate into huge hoardings containing several paragraphs of legalese; not a great idea for drivers hurtling by and trying to absorb information at 70mph.
However, every so often I do observe a sign which seems so peculiar that I want to know the backstory. If, for example you saw the following sign, do you think you'd understand it?
Passenger lifts
→
Assuming you were a passenger who wished to change floors without climbing stairs, you'd get the general idea that walking the way the little symbol-thing pointed might be a good idea?
So, I want to know what humorous misunderstandings and mishaps led to the placement of the following sign in Reading railway station:
Passenger lifts
please follow the
directional arrow.
→
Having added all those extra words, they could have added a 'For' at the front, which would have corrected the only possible ambiguity I can see in my alternative version above.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 01:48 pm (UTC)I like those signs - the idea that after October, delays will suddenly become impossible.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 01:50 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 02:21 pm (UTC)I frequently see people using more than one lane simultaneously. Usually when I'm trying to use one of them myself.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 02:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 03:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 03:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 07:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 03:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 03:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 06:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:17 pm (UTC)I fear that in today's multi-signed society we may have become blind/deaf to sign postings.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:42 pm (UTC)I had a strange conversation with someone from Thames Water yesterday. Since my water bill said (in large, very black letters) at the top "This amount must be paid in full by Nov 5th" I rather foolishly assumed that that meant I had to pay it in full by Nov 5th. She was faintly amused that I thought that.
It turned out that was totally wrong, and I shall now be paying it in installments beginning on Nov 7th.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:17 pm (UTC)My favourite theoretically misleading sign is "please take a seat". Although I've yet to hear of any instances of genuine confusion arising. It's the mental image which appeals!
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:44 pm (UTC)Mm, that's always seemed intuitively obvious to me when seeing such signs driving. It's preceded by an implicit "Oi! You lot!"
You might as well complain about a sign ordering you to "Use A53 for Wangleton" when you don't want to go to Wangleton.
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:25 pm (UTC)I've never been here before. What is this sign telling me?
I've been seeing that sign for the past two years, and you still haven't taken it down.
I've been seeing that sign for the past two years, and now you've changed the layout again! I ignored the second sign, and it all went wrong!
Seen on the A418 to Aylesbury.
(I may be misquoting that, but you get the gist.)
Argh. But where? That's 25 miles. Did a bus tip over on the next corner, and that's the only accident in three years? Pretty damn good that! Maybe it was at the other end of the trip, so I'm accident free for 24 miles! Or a pedestrian ran out of the hedge into the road? Not a lot I can do about that one, really.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:39 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:53 pm (UTC)And what is our being cautious going to achieve, exactly? We're either going to have an accident there, quite regardless of the number of previous accidents, or we're not. Should we throw caution to the winds on all other roads? I'd be happiest with people just driving carefully all the time, actually.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:35 pm (UTC)http://mydorset.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/sign-not-in-use.jpg
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:39 pm (UTC)cf. "This page intentionally left blank" on exam papers.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:52 pm (UTC)(Is it 'next right and Rufus Stone'? Argh, not remembering is annoying me now.)
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 05:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 05:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 06:23 pm (UTC)If I received an e-mail with such grammatical quality, I would click Report Spam.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 10:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-29 09:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-10-29 04:45 pm (UTC) - Expandno subject
Date: 2009-10-30 09:34 am (UTC)The Daily Telegraph has a weekly feature of daft signs (usually, but not exclusively, poor English translations): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/picturegalleries/signlanguage/