Signage - Sign

Question

Exhibit Group's manager explained to me that a sign is a physical thing. They make signs. But the graphics (text and/or pictures) that were on the sign were the signage. They could not make a sign until they had the signage in hand. Thus: "We need the signage by next Tuesday."
Do you agree with this distinction? Some people claim that signage and sign are synonyms.
GFH

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Do you agree with this distinction? Some people claim that signage and sign are synonyms.[/nq]
To me, "sign" denotes a particular sign, whereas "signage" denotes several signs working together.
The Facilities Manager at my hospital would say "the sign is broken" if a sign had fallen off a wall, but if one of the signs pointed the way from the main entrance to a particular department pointed the wrong way, he'd say "The signage is broken".

The "mypacks.net" address from which this message was sent is legitimate and not spam-trapped. It is, however, disposable.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Do you agree with this distinction? Some people claim that signage and sign are synonyms.[/nq]
[nq:1]To me, "sign" denotes a particular sign, whereas "signage" denotes several signs working together. The Facilities Manager at my hospital ... the way from the main entrance to a particular department pointed the wrong way, he'd say "The signage is broken".[/nq]
That makes perfect sense, but the word is still unpleasant and unnecessary. I have never seen an example in which it couldn't have been replaced with the ordinary word "signs". "Signage" does not , however, mean "text on a sign".

Mike.

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Exhibit Group's manager explained to me that a sign is a physical thing. They make signs. But the graphics (text ... they had the signage in hand. Thus: "We need the signage by next Tuesday." Do you agree with this distinction?[/nq]
No. "Signage"="signs".
Adrian

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Exhibit Group's manager explained to me that a sign is ... signage by next Tuesday." Do you agree with this distinction?[/nq]
[nq:1]No. "Signage"="signs".[/nq]
Then what does one call the words and/or graphics that one puts on a sign? I have to admit that the Exhibit Group definitions do make sense and result in a meaningful difference between sign and signage.
GFH

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]To me, "sign" denotes a particular sign, whereas "signage" denotes ... pointed the wrong way, he'd say "The signage is broken".[/nq]
[nq:1]That makes perfect sense, but the word is still unpleasant and unnecessary. I have never seen an example in which it couldn't have been replaced with the ordinary word "signs". "Signage" does not , however, mean "text on a sign".[/nq]
A sign is a discrete physical object. Signage is a system of signs. Someone designing signage has to consider not only the individual signs but their placement, frequency, and so forth. If I am in a department store with many well-designed signs bearing useful information indicating where I can find the products I desire, then this store has good signage, part of which is good signs. If the individual signs are well executed but there aren't enough of them, or they are placed poorly, then it has good signs but poor signage. Yes, there is much semantic overlap between the two forms in practice. As a matter of style it is perfectly reasonable to prefer "sign" within this overlap. But there are instances where "signage" is right and "sign" is wrong.
I have never understood the opposition to "signage". It follows a perfectly normal English pattern of forming mass noun by adding the suffix "-age", in the standard sense of "aggregate".

I have not seen "signage" to mean "text on a sign". It is possible that the term has been adapted as technical jargon, but if so it hasn't made its way into Merriam Webster.
Richard R. Hershberger

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]That makes perfect sense, but the word is still unpleasant ... not , however, mean "text on a sign".[/nq]
[nq:1]A sign is a discrete physical object. Signage is a system of signs. Someone designing signage has to consider not ... a perfectly normal English pattern of forming mass noun by adding the suffix "-age", in the standard sense of "aggregate".[/nq]
I'm almost convinced. I accept the analogous "coinage" without demur. I suppose it's out of the question to suggest "signalling". But, jesting apart, that hints at a clue to the objections: I wonder if my underlying feeling is that a derivative "ought to" have its "g" sounded, as in "assignation". This would require me to show that "signage" is formed in some way analogously to "assignation" but not to "assignment", which I don't think I can do. I fancy that, if had been up to me, I'd have chosen "signing", as with "signalling" from "signal".

Mike.

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]No. "Signage"="signs".[/nq]
[nq:1]Then what does one call the words and/or graphics that one puts on a sign?[/nq]
Lyrics.
Seriously, how about "words and graphics" or "content"?
[nq:1]I have to admit that the Exhibit Group definitions do make sense and result in a meaningful difference between sign and signage.[/nq]
Hmm.

Nam Sibbyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et *** illi pueri dicerent: beable beable beable; respondebat illa: doidy doidy doidy. (plorkwort)

Usenet · Answer

"The signs are wrong."

"Signage" is a perfect entry in buzzword bingo.
[nq:2]I have never understood the opposition to "signage". It follows ... adding the suffix "-age", in the standard sense of "aggregate".[/nq]
Garb -> garbage.
[nq:1]I fancy that, if had been up to me, I'd have chosen "signing", as with "signalling" from "signal".[/nq]
Wait a minute, are you saying there's something wrong with "signallage"?

Why are they sotto and alto and blotto?
I do not know. Go ask uncle oTTo! (Otto Bahn)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]A sign is a discrete physical object. Signage is a ... adding the suffix "-age", in the standard sense of "aggregate".[/nq]
[nq:1]I'm almost convinced. I accept the analogous "coinage" without demur. I suppose it's out of the question to suggest "signalling". ... can do. I fancy that, if had been up to me, I'd have chosen "signing", as with "signalling" from "signal".[/nq]
I had not previously seen the concern about the pronunciation of the 'g'. I would guess that its pronunciation in "assignation" is either a remnant of an obslete pronunciation of the base word or (and this seems more likely) a learned affectation that stuck. In any case, I would not expect a modern derivative of "sign" to have the 'g' pronounced.
I think the usual objection to "signage" is socio-linguistic. The word is thought of as technical jargon, and therefore a Bad Thing, and worse, it often comes through the Marketing Department, which is an even Worse Thing. Add to this that it often can be replaced by "signs" and it gets condemned as a useless buzz word.

Of course it can be and often is found as a useless buzz word, but so what? Any word can be misused. This has nothing to do with whether or not it can also be used well.
Richard R. Hershberger

Usenet · Answer

* Adam Funk wrote, On 3/28/07 6:41 AM:
[nq:1] Nam Sibbyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et *** illi pueri dicerent: beable beable beable; respondebat illa: doidy doidy doidy. (plorkwort)[/nq]
One can set their Google default language to Latin,

http://www.google.com/intl/la/
but not do a Latin translation.
What kinda free-as-in-beer interwebnet service do those pikers think they're runnin'?

anTon O'Masia ( antonomasia gmail com )

Signage - Sign

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions