In case …
- Author: Graham
- Filed under: Language
Mar 18,2009
Wherever I go in Europe, I seem to see signs outside lifts that say “Do not use the lift in case of fire”. Inevitably, one of the British people standing waiting for the lift to arrive then says “We shouldn’t use this lift, because it might catch fire”. Knowing smiles are exchanged, meaning “Foreigners can’t get English quite right, can they?”
This is another example of the ’same language false friends’ that I wrote about in another post. In US English, there is nothing wrong with the sentence, where “in case” means “if”, so the whole sentence means “Do not use the lift if there is a fire”. In British English, however, “in case” means “against the possibility”: “Do not use the lift because there may be a fire”.
The British English warning should read “In the event of fire, do not use the lift”.
Archives
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
Links
Recent Posts
- Bleck Het
- Moshtarak
- Wymondham (Norfolk) and Wymondley (Hertfordshire)
- Uttoxeter
- Abergavenny, etc
- hospital ~ orbital ~ digital
- More on 1880s pronunciation
- Port-au-Prince, Haiti
- Trend Setters
- 1880s English
- More Blunders
- Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab
- Intrusive r
- Dictionary of Blunders
- English stress – again
Recent Comments
- dw on More on 1880s pronunciation
- Carol on More on 1880s pronunciation
- Russell Cross on How many words?
- Jimmy Jam NR speaker on r-deletion
- Michael Lamb on Abergavenny, etc
- Michael Lamb on Abergavenny, etc
- Matthew Phillips on Abergavenny, etc
- John Maidment on Uttoxeter
- Michael Lamb on Wymondham (Norfolk) and Wymondley (Hertfordshire)
- Graham on Uttoxeter
- Eric Armstrong on Uttoxeter
- Graham on Uttoxeter
- Michael Lamb on Uttoxeter
- John Maidment on Uttoxeter
- Michael Lamb on hospital ~ orbital ~ digital
6 Responses for "In case …"
I grew up in Britain for my first 22 years and I don’t see anything wrong (or non-British) about “Do not use the lift in case of fire”, except that “in case of fire do not use the lift” would be slightly more elegant.
(Of course it’s possible that I’ve been corrupted by living in the US for the last 12 years, but I don’t think so in this case).
Well, I had to search long and hard on Google to find an instance of “Do not in case of ” (almost all co-locations of “do not” and “in case of” have the “in case of” first, usually followed by a comma), but finally I found one : “Do not use in case of rectal bleeding, as this may indicate serious disease.”
My interpretation of this (as a native speaker of ) is that the author is saying “If rectal bleeding is occurring, do not use [this substance]“, rather than “Do not use [this substance] in case it leads to rectal bleeding”.
Thus I tend to agree with “ds” that the “Do not use the lift in case of fire” example is not as open to mis-interpretation by speakers as Graham’s experiences in Europe have led him to believe.
Sorry, I used a number of angle-brackets in the previous message; both they and their contents have disappeared. It was meant to read (with dollars replacing angle brackets) :
Well, I had to search long and hard on Google to find an instance of “Do not $x$ in case of $y$” (almost all co-locations of “do not” and “in case of” have the “in case of” first, usually followed by a comma), but finally I found one : “Do not use in case of rectal bleeding, as this may indicate serious disease.”
My interpretation of this (as a native speaker of $Br.E$) is that the author is saying “If rectal bleeding is occurring, do not use [this substance]“, rather than “Do not use [this substance] in case it leads to rectal bleeding”.
Thus I tend to agree with “ds” that the “Do not use the lift in case of fire” example is not as open to mis-interpretation by $Br.E$ speakers as Graham’s experiences in Europe have led him to believe.
I find this post very hard to swallow (and the fact that this is a UK blog makes me all the more confused). Is “in case of fire” not as common in Britain as in mainland Europe?
I’ve always understood it to be true wherever English is the dominant language that “in case” usually (in ordinary, everyday language) means “against the possibility” but also (in highly formal language, i.e. officialese) means “if”. I’d like to see a reference for the claim that there’s a British/American difference going on here (I’m Australian, BTW, so more or less neutral).
Did the knowing smiles really mean, “foreigners can’t get English quite right”, or did they in fact mean, “highly formal language can be funny sometimes”?
A memorable example of the phrase “in case of fire” (actually, an ambiguous one in context now that I think about it) appears near the end of the Goodies episode “Rome Antics“. The episode can be found on Youtube in three installments (links below), and the relevant sign appears around 8:46 in the third installment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdEiZRua0Z4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NP3OSYWCE8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFrTZQ-njmE
Just remember to push the button in case of fire.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUJFaDK9Gfk
I think it’s not so much “in case of fire” that is open to misinterpretation, but “in case there’s a fire”, which very definitely means one thing in AmE and another thing in BrE.
BrE: “Don’t try and stroke the dog, in case he bites you.” “It’s better not to smoke, in case it kills you.” “Don’t run, in case you fall over.”
But not: “Don’t run, in case of falling over.”
Leave a reply