I'm a native English speaker and I've never been able to really parse this one. Is it a command aimed at the police? If so, shouldn't it be "police, take notice"? Is this construction used anywhere except these kind of signs?
8
-
First result on google is universalhub.com/glossary/police_take_notice.html, maybe someone will dig out something with better references– UnreasonJun 21, 2011 at 15:10
-
This discussion also addresses it, no source though boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=144878– aedia λJun 21, 2011 at 15:14
-
Seems to be a common sign phrase in Massachusetts: blog.emaki.net/2007/10/…– aedia λJun 21, 2011 at 15:20
-
1Do -any- street signs use punctuation? (periods, commas, etc) If not, then it's all up to the intention of the sign designers rather than what -should- be there. (Yes, I've always had a hard time myself understanding these kinds of sig: e.g. 'slow children playing' sounds like a cruel comment on the intelligence of local kids.)– MitchJun 21, 2011 at 15:28
-
1@MT_Head, I don't remember that kind of crosswalk sign, but I still see "automatic caution door" signs all over the place. (You know the ones: circular sticker with "automatic" curving along the top, "door" along the bottom, and "caution" straight across the middle.)– MarthaªJun 21, 2011 at 18:16
|
Show 3 more comments
4 Answers
It's a sign which informs the police that the property in question is privately owned and any person or persons trespassing aren't supposed to be there. The sign also gives the police the freedom to enter the property and remove any such persons if necessary without the direct approval of the owner, as the approval is implied in the sign.
And thus, the sign is there to inform the public that they cannot trespass and that the police take notice over how this sign is respected. The sign is correct and no comma is missing.
answered Jun 21, 2011 at 15:14
-
-
Unfortunately no, but I'm pretty sure any lawyer could confirm this. Jun 21, 2011 at 15:18
-
1I think it's arguable whether a comma is missing, but what's not arguable is that signs frequently omit punctuation, just as they typically use all uppercase letters. telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/6046862/… Jun 21, 2011 at 15:23
I agree this is odd, and bad grammar no matter what it means. My understanding of these signs is that they are required in many places in order for the police to be able to enforce protection of private property without the invitation of the property owner.
Ie, where the local laws are written this way:
Pretend you own a large field, and someone is camping in the back of it.
If you have a sign that says "no trespassing" or "no camping, police take notice", the sign is granting permission for the police to come onto your property and see who is camping back there.
If you do NOT have a sign, then the police would not be allowed to enter your property unless you invited them -- for instance, by calling them and saying "somebody is camping in my field! help!"
I'm pretty sure that's what the signs mean, but you're right about the grammar being incorrect.
It is effectively saying "The police do/will take notice". It's similar to you saying "Dogs run". It's a statement of fact.
I have never seen such a sign in the US and it certainly is grammatically incorrect. If it is commanding the police to take notice, then it should have a colon. If it is informing that the police do take notice, then it is missing the article ( the ) and the verb ( do ).
-
There's one right down the street in CT outside the Dunkin Donuts. Jun 22, 2011 at 14:52