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
Date: 2009-10-28 01:56 pm (UTC)And does "October" mean until the beginning of Oct, or until the end?
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 02:12 pm (UTC)"Possible Congestion Ahead till October".
This always confuses me; I wonder what impossible congestion would look like (presumably it would involve bizarre configurations of traffic that simply could not have arisen through actual driving), and I also start to think that I am in an uncollapsed quantum wave-form, with Schrodinger's congestion just down the road, about to resolve into either Actual Congestion or No Congestion At All.
I was the boy who, whenever we passed a sign saying "Free Recovery Ends" at the end of the motorway, was always disappointed that there was no little man standing by the sign to give me my promised Recovery End.
My favourite one of these -- which I saw in New Scientist's Feedback column, always a likely place -- is "All Refuse To Be Thrown In Skip Upon Leaving Plane". Apparently the reader who spotted it got a very stony-faced response when she was quite loud and assertive in expressing her refusal to be thrown in the skip.
I have only once taken personal action along the same lines, over a greengrocer's apostrophe (well, technically an optician's apostrophe) -- there was a sign saying "Required: Contact Len's Specialist". I went in and asked for Len's specialist's phone number, so I could fulfill their requirement, but they just looked at me bemusedly.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 02:20 pm (UTC)I rarely actually act on such impulses!
The toilets at work have strict signs instructing me to use the sanitary bins provided. I feel dreadfully guilty when I have nothing to put in them.
On the refuse/refuse problem: I (quite genuinely) misread a whole bunch of Oxford council's leaflets which said:
REDUCE REUSE RECYCLE
I initally parsed that as encouraging me to recycle as a means of reducing my reuse of various objects.
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
Date: 2009-10-28 03:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 03:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 03:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:02 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 04:17 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 04:21 pm (UTC)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 04:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:31 pm (UTC)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 04:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:39 pm (UTC)cf. "This page intentionally left blank" on exam papers.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 04:40 pm (UTC)It's the non-causalities you really have to have been watching out for.
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 04:42 pm (UTC)