Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Does Punctuation Really Matter?
Yes. A year ago I noticed a sign put up at my local dry cleaner. It read:
I can take this advice two very different ways. In one interpretation it reads that if I like the service and fail to inform the dry cleaner, then tell a friend instead that you like the service. The second interpretation and the one I assumed the dry cleaner meant was that if I like the service then please tell a friend, otherwise if I do not like the service inform the dry cleaner so presumedly the owner can remedy the situation and get the business back on track. The fact that I can read the sign in two ways makes the message ambiguous and therefore reflects poor communication. It makes an otherwise pithy attempt to reach out to consumers confusing.
Because I am a self appointed member of the grammar police and because there was no punctuation in places that reflected the true intent of the message, I could not help but read it the first way. I went back to the office and was distracted as only an officer of the force could be under the circumstances. I had a dilemma. How do I go back to the dry cleaner and explain my concern in a way that would make a difference? Would I be ignored? Laughed at? Be given a vacant stare? Have something thrown at me? The next day I tried my hand at explaining the situation to the on-duty clerk. At first she couldn't see it but then when I explained that perhaps what was really meant was : "If you like our service tell a friend, period. If you don't, comma, tell us." The comma, in particular,I suggested, really helps the reader understand that the auxilliary verb don't refers back to liking or not liking the service. Her face brightened. "Yes," she agreed, "I see the problem now." A few days later the sign had been changed to use the well placed comma and a period. Just another victory for the word warrior.
One can legitimately argue that now, the apparent sentence: If you don't, tell us, is actually not a sentence at all. It is a sentence fragment that looks like it is part of the previous sentence instead. A comma would be completely unnecessary if the fragment were to be changed to a real sentence like this: If you don't like the service tell us. But then the advice, which is really a piece of found poetry, would not have that snappy ring to it. Poetry and poetic licence in this case really require a snappy ring.
If you like our service
Tell a friend
If you don't tell us
I can take this advice two very different ways. In one interpretation it reads that if I like the service and fail to inform the dry cleaner, then tell a friend instead that you like the service. The second interpretation and the one I assumed the dry cleaner meant was that if I like the service then please tell a friend, otherwise if I do not like the service inform the dry cleaner so presumedly the owner can remedy the situation and get the business back on track. The fact that I can read the sign in two ways makes the message ambiguous and therefore reflects poor communication. It makes an otherwise pithy attempt to reach out to consumers confusing.
Because I am a self appointed member of the grammar police and because there was no punctuation in places that reflected the true intent of the message, I could not help but read it the first way. I went back to the office and was distracted as only an officer of the force could be under the circumstances. I had a dilemma. How do I go back to the dry cleaner and explain my concern in a way that would make a difference? Would I be ignored? Laughed at? Be given a vacant stare? Have something thrown at me? The next day I tried my hand at explaining the situation to the on-duty clerk. At first she couldn't see it but then when I explained that perhaps what was really meant was : "If you like our service tell a friend, period. If you don't, comma, tell us." The comma, in particular,I suggested, really helps the reader understand that the auxilliary verb don't refers back to liking or not liking the service. Her face brightened. "Yes," she agreed, "I see the problem now." A few days later the sign had been changed to use the well placed comma and a period. Just another victory for the word warrior.
One can legitimately argue that now, the apparent sentence: If you don't, tell us, is actually not a sentence at all. It is a sentence fragment that looks like it is part of the previous sentence instead. A comma would be completely unnecessary if the fragment were to be changed to a real sentence like this: If you don't like the service tell us. But then the advice, which is really a piece of found poetry, would not have that snappy ring to it. Poetry and poetic licence in this case really require a snappy ring.
# posted by Ninja @ 11:05 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
I commute by the London Underground. (As you will know, English subways are tunnels linking across busy roads and do not have trains. Also, although most people now refer to the Tube, strictly this refers only to those parts of the Underground which were bored, and not those dug from the surface, so I stick to the old "Underground" except when actually using the parts which are Tubes. Mind you, for part of my journey, the Underground line runs above ground...).
Anyway, a few years ago, when the electronic destination boards were upgraded, a warning was added which flashes just before trains arrive: "STAND BACK TRAIN APPROACHING". This irritated me, since although it is clearly a warning (it flashes urgently), for a long time I could not make any sense of it without punctuation.
I mused for a while over "Stand-back train approaching" since I was unsure whether the trains had stands at the back which we had to use (they didn't) or whether they perhaps stood back from the platform so we had to take a running jump onto them (they didn't). In that case they might have used the shorter and more common "Set-back train approaching" but of course they wouldn't want to talk of set-backs. They could perhaps have said "Challenging train approaching" but it would have too many characters to fit the sign.
Anyway, since neither "Stand-back" possibilities seemed to fit, I decided that perhaps the message started with a command: "Stand! Back train approaching." At first sight, that made sense. Someone had recently been killed on a level crossing near a (non-underground) station, when she started to cross behind the train she had just got off, not realising that another train was about to pass in the other direction behind it. A sign to warn that a back train was approaching seemed a very good idea.
In America, they might say "Don't walk!" rather than "Stand!" but then in order to fit the sign length, they'd have to shorten "approaching" to "coming" and the Freudian implications of trains coming in tunnels would be very messy and could frighten Londoners who are well aware that the lines are below river level.
But then I noticed that it was always the front train, not the back train, which approached, and anyway there are no walkways across the electric rails in Underground stations, so I dismissed that definition.
Perhaps it was a message to some member of staff called a Stand Back. It could be short for "This is a colleague announcement. Would the Stand Back please note that there is a train approaching. Thank you." There certainly are some ridiculous job titles around at present, so there might be a Stand Back, but since the platform staff have all, at great cost, been given special radios which work effectively throughout the stations, there would seem no reason to use the public announcement board to pass the information over to them.
I briefly considered "Stand back! Train approaching" as a command, but dismissed that as absurd. Why would they want us to stand back? Might the train be scared if we got too close, and start backing away, thus disrupting the timetable? They would hardly expect me to stand back in amazement "Cor blimey, luvaduck! If it ain't a train! And in a station too!"
And then it hit me (no, not the train -- I wasn't that forward! "Ooh, you saucy man, talking about me coming in the tunnel" Slap.). The realisation hit me that the lack of punctuation was correct. We might not be amazed to find a train ariving at all, but there had certainly been a lot of carping about poor service and overcrowding, with some commuters saying they couldn't stand it any longer. And a "back train" could well be a description of a train not really fit for public view, cf "back office". There again, on main line express trains travelling into London, the 1st class carriages are at the front, while the 3rd class ones are at the back. On the Underground, there is no 1st class, so the whole of the train would be the back.
The whole phrase must be the command "Stand back train approaching!" or more politely "I know you've said you can't stand it, but please be patient. It may not be the very latest in luxury...Yes, I know you've complained the train is late, but it's not the latest...but it's all we have, and it will take you safely to where you want to go. So please accept it with our thanks, and do stop being rude about it, because it's nearly here. You know you need it to do its job and if it hears your snide comments it may retaliate by refusing to go on."
At last, the message "Stand back train approaching" made sense. It's a warning to behave, just as children are warned to behave when an adult is coming into the room, and at the same time is a plea to accept the poor little train and not be nasty to it.
Yes, it all made sense. I was so relieved, I started to sing, to the tune of Simon & Garfunkel's "The Boxer", "Can you stand me? I'm just a back train, approaching from the left, and my carriages are dirty and..."
And now what REALLY annoys me is that I start singing that to myself every time the message comes on. I know it's stupid, but I can't stop doing it. I never get beyond the "carriages are..." because I'm too annoyed with myself by then. Anyway, I can't hear myself for the noise of the train arriving.
What angst I could have been saved if I'd been confident of the punctuation! On the subject of trailing prepositions, Winston Churchill apparently responded in a speech in the House of Commons "This is the sort of English up with which we cannot put." But that was in the heyday of what we call "butchers apostrophe's" and he couldn't legislate for punctuation although he would not be pleased about the now common lack of it in electronic usage when previously only solicitors wrote long sentences without commas semicolons etc
Post a Comment
Anyway, a few years ago, when the electronic destination boards were upgraded, a warning was added which flashes just before trains arrive: "STAND BACK TRAIN APPROACHING". This irritated me, since although it is clearly a warning (it flashes urgently), for a long time I could not make any sense of it without punctuation.
I mused for a while over "Stand-back train approaching" since I was unsure whether the trains had stands at the back which we had to use (they didn't) or whether they perhaps stood back from the platform so we had to take a running jump onto them (they didn't). In that case they might have used the shorter and more common "Set-back train approaching" but of course they wouldn't want to talk of set-backs. They could perhaps have said "Challenging train approaching" but it would have too many characters to fit the sign.
Anyway, since neither "Stand-back" possibilities seemed to fit, I decided that perhaps the message started with a command: "Stand! Back train approaching." At first sight, that made sense. Someone had recently been killed on a level crossing near a (non-underground) station, when she started to cross behind the train she had just got off, not realising that another train was about to pass in the other direction behind it. A sign to warn that a back train was approaching seemed a very good idea.
In America, they might say "Don't walk!" rather than "Stand!" but then in order to fit the sign length, they'd have to shorten "approaching" to "coming" and the Freudian implications of trains coming in tunnels would be very messy and could frighten Londoners who are well aware that the lines are below river level.
But then I noticed that it was always the front train, not the back train, which approached, and anyway there are no walkways across the electric rails in Underground stations, so I dismissed that definition.
Perhaps it was a message to some member of staff called a Stand Back. It could be short for "This is a colleague announcement. Would the Stand Back please note that there is a train approaching. Thank you." There certainly are some ridiculous job titles around at present, so there might be a Stand Back, but since the platform staff have all, at great cost, been given special radios which work effectively throughout the stations, there would seem no reason to use the public announcement board to pass the information over to them.
I briefly considered "Stand back! Train approaching" as a command, but dismissed that as absurd. Why would they want us to stand back? Might the train be scared if we got too close, and start backing away, thus disrupting the timetable? They would hardly expect me to stand back in amazement "Cor blimey, luvaduck! If it ain't a train! And in a station too!"
And then it hit me (no, not the train -- I wasn't that forward! "Ooh, you saucy man, talking about me coming in the tunnel" Slap.). The realisation hit me that the lack of punctuation was correct. We might not be amazed to find a train ariving at all, but there had certainly been a lot of carping about poor service and overcrowding, with some commuters saying they couldn't stand it any longer. And a "back train" could well be a description of a train not really fit for public view, cf "back office". There again, on main line express trains travelling into London, the 1st class carriages are at the front, while the 3rd class ones are at the back. On the Underground, there is no 1st class, so the whole of the train would be the back.
The whole phrase must be the command "Stand back train approaching!" or more politely "I know you've said you can't stand it, but please be patient. It may not be the very latest in luxury...Yes, I know you've complained the train is late, but it's not the latest...but it's all we have, and it will take you safely to where you want to go. So please accept it with our thanks, and do stop being rude about it, because it's nearly here. You know you need it to do its job and if it hears your snide comments it may retaliate by refusing to go on."
At last, the message "Stand back train approaching" made sense. It's a warning to behave, just as children are warned to behave when an adult is coming into the room, and at the same time is a plea to accept the poor little train and not be nasty to it.
Yes, it all made sense. I was so relieved, I started to sing, to the tune of Simon & Garfunkel's "The Boxer", "Can you stand me? I'm just a back train, approaching from the left, and my carriages are dirty and..."
And now what REALLY annoys me is that I start singing that to myself every time the message comes on. I know it's stupid, but I can't stop doing it. I never get beyond the "carriages are..." because I'm too annoyed with myself by then. Anyway, I can't hear myself for the noise of the train arriving.
What angst I could have been saved if I'd been confident of the punctuation! On the subject of trailing prepositions, Winston Churchill apparently responded in a speech in the House of Commons "This is the sort of English up with which we cannot put." But that was in the heyday of what we call "butchers apostrophe's" and he couldn't legislate for punctuation although he would not be pleased about the now common lack of it in electronic usage when previously only solicitors wrote long sentences without commas semicolons etc
# posted by 
: 1:39 AM
: 1:39 AM << Home
