DarloRich
Veteran Member
Guilty as charged.
Shall we just use station?
Guilty as charged.
Shall we just use station?
Even today, I would have thought that most people would understand "the station" to mean the railway station, which is so called, of course, because it is a station on a railway. In the past one might have had various reasons for visiting a railway station which did not involve catching a train.It is something to do with the loss of centrality to the public mind of the railway that 'train station' developed. Younger people perhaps believe that 'train' somehow supplanted 'railway' in the phrase in everyday conversation, but that is a simplification. Forty or fifty years ago when I was young, in ordinary spoken contexts 'station' on its own was used and understood to mean 'railway station', which would generally have sounded formal, if not pretentious in conversation. It was all the other stations, bus, fire, etc., that required qualifiers. It was the loss of pre-eminence of the railway in popular experience that brought about 'train station'. Many younger people, feeling 'station' insufficiently specific, did not know that 'railway station' already existed as it was not a conversational commonplace, and besides it makes some logical sense. After all one goes to the station to catch a train, not a railway. And 'train station' is one syllable shorter, which swings it for those in a hurry.
It doesn't matter.
we always have a discussion in the office as to whether you go to the train station or railway station?
Even today, I would have thought that most people would understand "the station" to mean the railway station, which is so called, of course, because it is a station on a railway. In the past one might have had various reasons for visiting a railway station which did not involve catching a train.
Even today, I would have thought that most people would understand "the station" to mean the railway station, which is so called, of course, because it is a station on a railway. In the past one might have had various reasons for visiting a railway station which did not involve catching a train.
I was a bit surprised when West Midlands franchise went with Railway for both brands, but then again I am used to my local franchise not using the term at all, being before LM and Central Trains.
It feels the term Railway was a bit more old fashioned term, but it certainly has a more quality feel than the word Trains when used in a brand, and like already said, more of a nostalgia feel.
This kind of works when FirstGroup rebranded FGW to GWR trying to sweep away its negative reputation by bringing in a traditional nostaglic image. I have to admit the GWR branding style looks beautiful and really good quality even the service can sometimes be dismal.
I really like GWR's racing green colour and use of brushed metal effect and leather on seating and interiors giving this a premium feel on some trains - obviously not on Pacers!
Like others I had hopes when the SW franchise was passed to FirstGroup, that the GWR branding style could sort of be replicated for SWR however with a maroon/dark red colour scheme. But alas, that didn't happen.
Instead with SWR, we gained a bland grey theme as it is more of a commuter railway though both SWR and GWR seem similarly named and both owned by same parent company but each are miles apart in styling!
It is a real shame that SWR didn't receive a modern snazzy look like TPE if the traditional styling of GWR wouldn't be suitable.
Yes, but it isn't because of the name.Would it not be reasonable for the average passenger to assume that a company called South Western Railway were responsible for the railway infrastructure?
A railway is what trains run on, they are not interchangeable terms , you can't run a railway on a train (cue smart alec remarks about having an office and a boardroom on a train.....).
Personally I abhor "train station" as an American interloper but I'm old.
Good question.
I once took a taxi in Coventry from the city centre to the station, I requested to be taken to the "railway station" but to be met with a blank stare then I changed the wording to "train station" and this was understood!
indeed but as any fule kno only Railway Station is correct. To use train station shows a total lack of intelligence, education, and manners. Why mark yourself out as a plebeian?
So am I and I do tooPersonally I abhor "train station" as an American interloper but I'm old.
It is something to do with the loss of centrality to the public mind of the railway that 'train station' developed. Younger people perhaps believe that 'train' somehow supplanted 'railway' in the phrase in everyday conversation, but that is a simplification. Forty or fifty years ago when I was young, in ordinary spoken contexts 'station' on its own was used and understood to mean 'railway station', which would generally have sounded formal, if not pretentious in conversation. It was all the other stations, bus, fire, etc., that required qualifiers. It was the loss of pre-eminence of the railway in popular experience that brought about 'train station'. Many younger people, feeling 'station' insufficiently specific, did not know that 'railway station' already existed as it was not a conversational commonplace, and besides it makes some logical sense. After all one goes to the station to catch a train, not a railway. And 'train station' is one syllable shorter, which swings it for those in a hurry.
Yes, but it isn't because of the name.
Passengers see the railway as "the railway", not as separate companies.
As someone else posted, when things go wrong, it's whoever the passenger can see is whose fault it is.
Ah yes, that's right... they think British Rail owns it.Many regular users know train companies aren't responsible for track, signalling etc but the SWR name does rather suggest otherwise.
Ah yes, that's right... they think British Rail owns it.
If these "people" know train companies aren't responsible then it doesn't matter what a train company calls itself.
Historically, a railway station is a place the railway industry is based (“stationed”); the Stationmaster would have had a much bigger operational role in the running of the service than they do now, with a team of staff including porters and booking clerks even at smaller stations, I don’t think it’s anything to do with a train stopping there. Hence also the terms fire station (where the fire service are stationed), police station, etc. This is the reason I believe the term “train station” makes no sense in a British context, as we have a “railway industry” and not a “train industry” or “railroad industry” as they say in the USA.Regarding Railway/train stations, this has got me thinking about the broad use of stations to describe various things, such as fire/police, etc.
A bus station is where a bus stops, and a railway/train station is where a train stops. What happens at a work station?
People who don't understand the complicated workings of UK railways are the problem?Those who don't know that are the problem.
People who don't understand the complicated workings of UK railways are the problem?
I dont' understand the complicated running of a car engine. Does that make me a problem to mechanics?
In my experience, people barely understand the difference between companies, let alone who is responsible for what; and most people don't care. These days, people don't have time to learn something they don't have an interest in.
I'd love to know how car engines work but I haven't the time nor the motivation to learn. My life is too full of other stuff to bother.
At least we haven't started referring to passengers as 'riders'.
No, we've started referring to them as 'customers'. Grrrr....
No, we've started referring to them as 'customers'. Grrrr....