# Please yield to alighting passengers



## wha002

Incorrect translation of warnings, slogans and titles from Chinese to English is a common problem in China.

Here are some examples of warning signs from local subway station.  Some of these examples definitely have language problems, but I don’t know how to put it in English in a both correct and concise way. Some of these cause my doubts, and I need opinion from native speakers to determine whether it is wrong or not.

This is a self-assigned project. I am not a stuff of local subway or having any connection with them. I intend to write an article under this topic, based on my own findings and the discussions here in this post, and publish it in local online media.

I hope my English is better than that of the examples we will discuss.

The questions will be posted following the one post one question rule.

 Many thanks in advance. 

Question one: “Please yield to alighting passengers”

Does it appropriate to use “yield to” here?  I think it is better to be “Please give way to alighting passengers”.
<_——-Chinese text removed by moderator (Florentia52)——->
_
That's it for today, more to come.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

I'm replying only to the first because each question has to have its own thread. You are right that 'give way' is more likely than 'yield'.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

For me 'Give way' is more appropriate for cars.  In the underground I'd prefer 'Make way'.

Reminds me of a trip I made to Hamlet when I lived in France.  The ghost's costume got stuck in the wings and the lively French students were quick to see the irony, shouting 'Make way for the ghost!'


----------



## velisarius

If the aim of the sign is to communicate meaning to foreigners, many of whom will not have a perfect grasp of English (yield, alight?), something like "Stand away from the doors. Allow passengers to get off first" might be more effective.


----------



## kentix

"Give way" is a not a term commonly used in that context in AE.


----------



## JulianStuart

velisarius said:


> If the aim of the sign is to communicate meaning to foreigners, many of whom will not have a perfect grasp of English (yield, alight?), something like "Stand away from the doors. Allow passengers to get off first" might be more effective.



"Get off" is probably considered too "informal" but I would certainly prefer it to 


> Collins Concise English Dictionary © HarperCollins Publishers::
> *detrain* /diːˈtreɪn/vb  to leave or cause to leave a railway train, as passengers, etc


----------



## Uncle Jack

Please let passengers get off (the train) first.

"Alight" is used in official notices, but it is rarely used in ordinary English, and I think even in official notices its use is decreasing. "Yield" tends not to be used like this in BrE, and the usual equivalent is "give way", but again this isn't an everyday term except when it comes to traffic priorities, which is not really the case here. You really want people on the platform to make room for the alighting passengers, not merely to stop boarding the train themselves. I like Thomas Tompion's "make way".


----------



## JulianStuart

"Please be polite - let passengers get off before you get on!"


----------



## kentix

I think we might say "disembarking" instead of alighting in that context.

Our subway message says something like "Please allow other passengers to exit the train before attempting to board."


----------



## JulianStuart

kentix said:


> I think we might say "disembarking" instead of alighting in that context.
> 
> Our subway message says something like "Please allow other passengers to exit the train before attempting to board."


I wonder how much "exit" is accepted in BE as a transitive verb.  The Collins (BE) dictionary does not list such a usage while the Random House (AE) does.  Perhaps about as much as AE accepts "alighting"?


----------



## sound shift

JulianStuart said:


> I wonder how much "exit" is accepted in BE as a transitive verb.


I've seen it in a sports context: "Other Premier League clubs have exited the Cup."


----------



## dojibear

wha002 said:


> Question one: “Please yield to alighting passengers”
> 
> Does it appropriate to use “yield to” here? I think it is better to be “Please give way to alighting passengers”.



I agree: it is not clear what "yield" means here. We use the word "Yield" on highways signs, so it might be understood by drivers, but "give way" is a little clearer. "Alighting" is rarely said in AE. The most natural command is*:

Let people get off* before you try to get on. 

Here "let" means "allow; permit". 

(I am agreeing with post #8)


----------



## Egmont

This message should be as short as possible. I like "Let people off the train first." It is obvious what "first" refers to. No need to use extra words. 

Actually, the words "the train" in my version may also be unnecessary. "Let people off first" may be enough.


----------



## romsterson

Egmont said:


> This message should be as short as possible. I like "Let people off the train first." It is obvious what "first" refers to. No need to use extra words.
> 
> Actually, the words "the train" in my version may also be unnecessary. "Let people off first" may be enough.



As a non-native speaker I like the combination of the last two posts: *"Let people get off first"*
I think most non-native English speakers will recognize verb "get off" more than just use "off" standing there by itself.


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

kentix said:


> Our subway message says something like "Please allow other passengers to exit (or 'leave') the train before attempting to board."



This one sounds good to me. Sometimes heard (spoken by the motorman* over the train's PA system): "Let 'em off, let'em off!"
*Is that "engine driver" in BE (as in "A Quick One While He's Away" from The Who's album _Happy Jack_?).


----------



## Linkway

"Egress before ingress" is concise but would not be widely understood.


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

By the way, wha002, is the sentence on a written sign or on a spoken (recorded) message?


----------



## JulianStuart

sound shift said:


> I've seen it in a sports context: "Other Premier League clubs have exited the Cup."


Yup - it's often in "sports English" that the rot sets in


----------



## kentix

JulianStuart said:


> Yup - it's often in "sports English" that the rot sets in


Wow, I had no idea you think that's unusual. It's entirely common here to exit anything that's "enterable".


----------



## natkretep

Here's a Singaporean sign.






I wouldn't use _alight_ myself here, but Singaporeans seem happy to use _alight _rather more than other people, perhaps as a result of these signs. A simple 'Let passengers out first' would do the job.


----------



## JulianStuart

kentix said:


> Wow, I had no idea you think that's unusual. It's entirely common here to exit anything that's "enterable".


See #10 above.  I am completely famiiar with it having learnt AE but it's probably on the list of many BE speakers who routinely grumble (often with mistaken justification) about what the Americans have "done to the language"


----------



## prudent260

JulianStuart said:


> I wonder how much "exit" is accepted in BE as a transitive verb.  The Collins (BE) dictionary does not list such a usage while the Random House (AE) does.  Perhaps about as much as AE accepts "alighting"?



Please allow other passengers to exit *from *the train before attempting to board."

Julian, just want to make sure. Is this more idiomatic in BE?

Thank you.


----------



## Uncle Jack

We use "exit" as a transitive verb in BrE. It doesn't sound unnatural (not to me at any rate), unlike some neologisms and what are perceived to be Americanisms, but it does not come naturally, and I would not have occurred to me to use it in this situation.


----------



## wha002

Sorry for break the rule.

Thank you for all your reply

If I upload a picture containing Chinese, would it break any rule?


----------



## wha002

ain'ttranslationfun? said:


> By the way, wha002, is the sentence on a written sign or on a spoken (recorded) message?



It is on a written sign.


----------



## wha002

velisarius said:


> If the aim of the sign is to communicate meaning to foreigners, many of whom will not have a perfect grasp of English (yield, alight?), something like "Stand away from the doors. Allow passengers to get off first" might be more effective.



I agree, the sign should be as simple and concise as possible. I think “stand away” go too far, the passengers on the platform are only supposed to wait by the door.


----------



## wha002

JulianStuart said:


> "Get off" is probably considered too "informal" but I would certainly prefer it to



Is the word "detrain" commoly used?


----------



## wha002

Uncle Jack said:


> Please let passengers get off (the train) first.
> 
> ""Yield" tends not to be used like this in BrE, and the usual equivalent is "give way", but again this isn't an everyday term except when it comes to traffic priorities, which is not really the case here.".


My understanding about “yield to” is that it has the wrong meaning here in the sign, because it means “give up”.  Am I correct?


----------



## PaulQ

wha002 said:


> Is the word "detrain" commonly used?


No - it is exceptionally rare. See #6.


wha002 said:


> Am I correct?


No. 1. The verb is *not *"yield to" - it is "yield", and it may take two objects - the indirect object is often preceded by "to".
2. The reason that you give is incorrect.


----------



## wha002

Based on all your input, here are five alternative ways to say the same thing

1.  Please make way to disembarking passengers;

2.  Allow passengers to detrain first;

3.  Please allow other passengers to exit the train before attempting to board;

4.  Let passengers get off before you get on;

5.  Let people get off first; 

6.  Egress before ingress;

I will try to choice one from them.


----------



## PaulQ

wha002 said:


> 1. Please make way to for disembarking passengers;
> 
> 2. Allow passengers to detrain first;
> 
> 3. Please allow other passengers to exit the train before attempting to board;
> 
> 4. Let passengers get off before you get on;
> 
> 5. Let people get off first;
> 
> 6. Egress before ingress;





> I will try to choice choose one of them.


 Choice = noun; choose = verb.


----------



## Keith Bradford

wha002 said:


> Based on all your input, here are five alternative ways to say the same thing
> 
> 1.  Please make way to disembarking passengers;
> 
> 2.  Allow passengers to detrain first;
> 
> 3.  Please allow other passengers to exit the train before attempting to board;
> 
> 4.  Let passengers get off before you get on;
> 
> 5.  Let people get off first;
> 
> 6.  Egress before ingress;
> 
> I will try to choice one from them.


OK. Just don't choose nos. 1, 2, 3 or 6.


----------



## wha002

PaulQ said:


> Choice = noun; choose = verb.


Thank you for your time. I will try to be more carefully about my English.


PaulQ said:


> 2. The reason that you give is incorrect.


I checked “yield” on Oxford dictionary, it has the meaning of “give way to vehicles“. Is it the reason why it should not be used in the sentence, despite it is rarely used in this way?


----------



## wha002

Keith Bradford said:


> OK. Just don't choose nos. 1, 2, 3 or 6.


Thanks, but I am trying to find the right language for a written sign. Would 4 and 5 be too informal and spoken?


----------



## Packard

This is not on a sign, but in a list of rules of etiquette.

10 Tips For Train Etiquette in Japan - What Not To Do

 Before getting on the train, make sure to stand to the side and let people off first.


----------



## wha002

I just realized Nos.4, "Let passengers get off before you get on", could be terribly misinterpreted.


----------



## wha002

Packard said:


> This is not on a sign, but in a list of rules of etiquette.
> 
> Before getting on the train, make sure to stand to the side and let people off first.



If I understand you correctly: my question comes from a warning sign in local subway.


----------



## Uncle Jack

wha002 said:


> I just realized Nos.4, "Let passengers get off before you get on", could be terribly misinterpreted.


No it couldn't. English is full of _double entendres _for those who like looking for such things, and most sentences in English can be read in different ways depending on the context. "Let passengers get off before you get on" is about as unambiguous a sentence as you will find in English.


----------



## JulianStuart

wha002 said:


> I just realized Nos.4, "Let passengers get off before you get on", could be terribly misinterpreted.


That is NOT the "Top Definition:" in most dictionaries - perhaps in a slang dictionary.  It is barely mentioned in the WRF https://www.wordreference.com/definition/get off. In the context above, that definition wold be considered "wilful misinterpretation", probably as some immature attempt at humour.

It is more informal/colloquial than "alight" (BE) or "exit" (manily AE). Official signs tend to use more formal words. That is the cause for much of this discussion.

Added while cross-posting: As Uncle Jack points out, and you will find in the first sticky thread in the forum 


> *Context and Background*
> 
> All threads need context and background.
> *English* words and *phrases* can have many different meanings. *Understanding them depends on where, when and how* they are used. When you post a question, please include as much background information and context as you can.


You have provided good context and background and the meaning would not be interpreted as you thought


----------



## PaulQ

wha002 said:


> I checked “yield” on Oxford dictionary, it has the meaning of “give way to vehicles“. Is it the reason why it should not be used in the sentence, despite it is rarely used in this way?


No.
1. The Oxford dictionary is either wrong in its definition or you are quoting an example, not the definition. The adverbial phrase "to vehicles" as part of the definition is inaccurate and might only apply on a road sign bearing that word only.
2. Yield is not used much, and never on signs, in this meaning in BE (which is what I speak.)
3. To yield means "to give [something that is required by the context]"
4. In the sense of getting off a train, "Yield/give (imperative) precedence [to those getting off the train]".
5. In broad terms, instead of "yield", BE uses "Give way", i.e. Give the disembarking passengers priority.


----------



## kentix

Yield is on road signs in America.  When two lanes of traffic are merging into one then one lane is given a yield sign to indicate the other lane has priority. Stopping isn't required by the rules (and not expected either) but if stopping is required by the circumstances then the cars in the "yield" lane are the ones who should stop.


----------



## Packard

I see this sign twice a day: once while driving to work, and the second time while traveling home.

It means that I have to slow or stop my car if there is a pedestrian within the walkway.  That is often misinterpreted by pedestrians to mean that they can, without regard for safety or intelligent thought, step in front of moving cars and the cars will stop in time.


----------



## JulianStuart

I am now routinely passing the first sign here, since I started taking my health a bit more seriously and am biking more. The second one I used to see in my youth when I cross-country skied often.  Neither "Yield" sign mentions vehicles.


----------



## Uncle Jack

JulianStuart said:


> View attachment 29095 View attachment 29096
> I am now routinely passing the first sign here, since I started taking my health a bit more seriously and am biking more. The second one I used to see in my youth when I cross-country skied often.  Neither "Yield" sign mentions vehicles.


That top left picture depicts a vehicle, at least in BrE (and, as I understand it, in UK law).


----------



## wha002

PaulQ said:


> No.
> 1. The Oxford dictionary is either wrong in its definition or you are quoting an example, not the definition. The adverbial phrase "to vehicles" as part of the definition is inaccurate and might only apply on a road sign bearing that word only.
> 2. Yield is not used much, and never on signs, in this meaning in BE (which is what I speak.)
> 3. To yield means "to give [something that is required by the context]"
> 4. In the sense of getting off a train, "Yield/give (imperative) precedence [to those getting off the train]".
> 5. In broad terms, instead of "yield", BE uses "Give way", i.e. Give the disembarking passengers priority.



Thank you very much for your time.


----------



## wha002

JulianStuart said:


> View attachment 29095 View attachment 29096
> I am now routinely passing the first sign here, since I started taking my health a bit more seriously and am biking more. The second one I used to see in my youth when I cross-country skied often.  Neither "Yield" sign mentions vehicles.



Thanks

With your input and above discussions, I think I can conclude that “yield to” is not wrong in the sentence in question, only may be rarely used in this way.

By the way, why should people give way to those who ride horse?  Hard to control?


----------



## wha002

Packard said:


> I see this sign twice a day: once while driving to work, and the second time while traveling home.
> 
> It means that I have to slow or stop my car if there is a pedestrian within the walkway.  That is often misinterpreted by pedestrians to mean that they can, without regard for safety or intelligent thought, step in front of moving cars and the cars will stop in time.



Yes, we have lots of pedestrians here think the same.


----------



## Uncle Jack

Packard said:


> It means that I have to slow or stop my car if there is a pedestrian within the walkway. That is often misinterpreted by pedestrians to mean that they can, without regard for safety or intelligent thought, step in front of moving cars and the cars will stop in time.


In Britain, there is a specific requirement to be prepared to stop for people who have not yet started to cross the road:
195
*Zebra crossings. *As you approach a zebra crossing

look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
_Highway Code_, section 195​and this is routinely observed. As people approach a crossing, cars stop, and for a car not to stop is regarded as extremely discourteous. If a pedestrian steps out into the crossing in front of a moving car and the car hits the pedestrian, if the car had not reached the crossing at the time the pedestrian stepped into the road, then the car driver will liable for prosecution. The next point makes this clear, with "MUST" in block capitals:

you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
The relevant statute is The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997:
25.—(1) Every pedestrian, if he is on the carriageway within the limits of a Zebra crossing, which is not for the time being controlled by a constable in uniform or traffic warden, before any part of a vehicle has entered those limits, shall have precedence within those limits over that vehicle and the driver of the vehicle shall accord such precedence to any such pedestrian.​


----------



## Packard

Uncle Jack said:


> In Britain, there is a specific requirement to be prepared to stop for people who have not yet started to cross the road:
> 195
> *Zebra crossings. *As you approach a zebra crossing
> 
> look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
> _Highway Code_, section 195​and this is routinely observed. As people approach a crossing, cars stop, and for a car not to stop is regarded as extremely discourteous. If a pedestrian steps out into the crossing in front of a moving car and the car hits the pedestrian, if the car had not reached the crossing at the time the pedestrian stepped into the road, then the car driver will liable for prosecution. The next point makes this clear, with "MUST" in block capitals:
> 
> you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
> The relevant statute is The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997:
> 25.—(1) Every pedestrian, if he is on the carriageway within the limits of a Zebra crossing, which is not for the time being controlled by a constable in uniform or traffic warden, before any part of a vehicle has entered those limits, shall have precedence within those limits over that vehicle and the driver of the vehicle shall accord such precedence to any such pedestrian.​


NY State law differs slightly:


At crosswalks where there isn't a traffic control signal or officer, pedestrians have the right-of-way.
If there aren't any crosswalks, signs or signals, the pedestrian must yield the right-of-way to all vehicles.
Regardless of the right-of-way, the driver is required by law to take great care to avoid "hitting" pedestrians.
I don't think that means that a pedestrian can blithely step in front of a vehicle moving at the speed limit (25 m.p.h.).


----------



## natkretep

In traffic contexts, 'give way' can be seen in signs outside of North America. Some examples:


----------



## Packard

Logically, the person better situated to avoid the accident should be responsible. An adult on foot can stop and/or change directions in much less distance than the driver of a car and is in a better position to avoid the accident.


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

Logically also, regaring the signs in #43, A rider can't stop a horse as quickly as a bicylist or a hiker can stop, and a skier is moving too fast to read the sign!

The English under the Chinese characters on the sign you show in #37 is clear and understandable, if a bit quaint. They're not going to change it, so don't worry about it!


----------



## velisarius

ain'ttranslationfun? said:


> The English under the Chinese characters on the sign you show in #37 is clear and understandable, if a bit quaint.



English is a _lingua franca _in public spaces, because obviously signs cannnot be posted in all the major foreign languages. The terms "yield" and "alight" are not the ideal choice, and not even in today's multicultural and "hungry-for-tourists" England, I imagine.


----------



## wha002

ain'ttranslationfun? said:


> Logically also, regaring the signs in #43, A rider can't stop a horse as quickly as a bicylist or a hiker can stop, and a skier is moving too fast to read the sign!
> 
> The English under the Chinese characters on the sign you show in #37 is clear and understandable, if a bit quaint. They're not going to change it, so don't worry about it!



Yes, probably very few people really pay attention to the sign.

I want to make a change.


----------

