Hmm. I believe that "FULL" in this case is a direct reference to the text of the sign being mentioned, and the quotation marks are therefore appropriate.
I agree with anonymous...
ok anon, you are just being way lame! Its called funny, when you make things up about quotation marks!Anyways thats just my opinion.
No Cassie, the anon is right. What we have here is a classic case of use-mention distinction. In context, "full" refers to what the sign says, and the quotation marks are absolutely required
Does that mean it has some spaces but they are being saved for other, more important people?
They are 100% not required. Sorry. We don't even know that the sign says "full"
I agree; also, don't forget that we are not reading a newspaper article here. The designer of this sign has already set "full" apart by making it a different color and font size than some of the sign's other elements. This is another reason that it seems a little funny and overkill to tack on quotation marks as well.I hate it when I post a comment that sounds so serious...
Anonymous here again (really, this time with the correct radio button, um, radioed). I never said the post wasn't funny, so I really don't know where you got that from. You should feel safe in assuming that in fact I do find it funny (and that I think quotation mark abusers generally deserve what they get here...after all, I am reading this blog). But when you poke fun at people, especially when you suggest ignorance and/or lower intelligence, you had better make sure that your position is solid.
This sign is punctuated correctly. We can find fault with it only if we assume that the sign being referred to doesn't say "full," and this would be a stupid assumption to make. (What else would a sign indicating lot fullness say?)
Well, correct or not I was rather amused to see that sign because I live 5 miles from that parking garage :)
Post a Comment