The Great and Less Than Great Canadian Logo Thread

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by GeneralLeeTPHLS

I like that Edmonton sign! It may be a bit too brown but it's a vast improvement over what a lot of major Ontario cities have.

Also..going back to what O-tacular said on no need for population on signs after 1 mil.....I gotta agree that it's pretty pointless.

In Toronto for example...the signs that actually show the population at the time of installation look really inaccurate after a few years. I see some signs say "2,600,000" or whatever on them..but here's one I found on google:

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

Now the population is at....something like 2,758,000. (That sign looks like it's from the north end....)

[MolsonExport]

Bah, I kind of like seeing the city population numbers ramp up every time I drive the 401.

[SkahHigh]

Kinda dumb to put population numbers on a sign when population changes every year lol

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

Kinda dumb to put population numbers on a sign when population changes every year lol

You can actually see on one of the Toronto signs the numbers are slightly lifted where they've been changed.

[Horus]

Keep your Circle K and Mac's and Winks and all of that. This is where it's at:


Or for those with really long memories:

[Horus]

Also, for milk and conveniences:


Anybody know if there are still any of these around?

[DrJoe]

I find the population on the signs to be really handy. There are so many unknown towns around Ontario, that perhaps you haven't even heard of until you drive by, and it gives you a good sense of what the place is like. And yes the figure is changed every few years, perhaps with census updates.

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

I don't really care for Beckers....the only one I've shopped at is incredibly expensive. I'm sure a Beckers in most places is actually a fair convenience store...but it's just weird to see a Beckers that used to be a Mac's that somehow grew to be more expensive.

[Laceoflight]

What strikes me the most other than the population number on these Toronto signs, is the part where it's written :
«Bienvenue à la capitale de l'Ontario».

The proper sentence in French would be more like :
«Bienvenue dans la capitale de l'Ontario». Or :
«Bienvenue dans la capitale ontarienne». Or just :
«Capitale de l'Ontario».

Anyway. Bad syntax. On an important sign.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Laceoflight

What strikes me the most other than the population number on these Toronto signs, is the part where it's written :
«Bienvenue à la capitale de l'Ontario».

The proper sentence in French would be more like :
«Bienvenue dans la capitale de l'Ontario». Or :
«Bienvenue dans la capitale ontarienne». Or just :
«Capitale de l'Ontario».

Anyway. Bad syntax. On an important sign.

That's not even that bad. You can easily find much worse than that upon leaving the province.

For example:
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9884...7i13312!8i6656

I'd give Toronto a B for the good effort there.

[kwoldtimer]

A French(ish) road sign in New Hampshire? Surprising.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

A French(ish) road sign in New Hampshire? Surprising.

Signs are in French for a while after you leave Quebec in all directions, in my experience. At least in ON/NY/VT/NH/NB, I'm not totally sure for Maine -- been so long since I went. Courtesy to us, I suppose.

[Laceoflight]

Originally Posted by lio45

That's not even that bad. You can easily find much worse than that upon leaving the province.
I'd give Toronto a B for the good effort there.

Sure, your example is worse (and hilarious), but still, it remains kind of awkward to read. Let's take the situation in reverse. On an hypothetical sign, you read :

Bienvenue à Montréal
Welcome at Montreal

instead of

Bienvenue à Montréal
Welcome to Montreal

How would people react?
It's the same kind of error : wrong preposition.
Just sayin'

[niwell]

I have no idea who did the translation for that sign, but when we do translation stuff in my branch of the Ontario government it's almost always done through a consulting service in Montreal.

Interestingly enough the francophones in Northern Ontario want our English stuff because they assume the french versions will be off...

[Elmira Guy]

Originally Posted by Laceoflight

Sure, your example is worse (and hilarious), but still, it remains kind of awkward to read. Let's take the situation in reverse. On an hypothetical sign, you read :

Bienvenue à Montréal
Welcome at Montreal

instead of

Bienvenue à Montréal
Welcome to Montreal

How would people react?
It's the same kind of error : wrong preposition.
Just sayin'

Granted I haven't taken French since high school, but what is the difference between the two examples you offer here?

[lio45]

Are you asking what the difference is between "Welcome at Montreal" and "Welcome to Montreal" ?

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

I'm on the same boat as Elmira....except I know how to ask to go the washroom in Canadian French and that's about it.

[GORDBO]

Originally Posted by lio45

Are you asking what the difference is between "Welcome at Montreal" and "Welcome to Montreal" ?

I think what Elmira guy is saying, is that both french phrases are exactly the same,

[lio45]

Originally Posted by GORDBO

I think what Elmira guy is saying, is that both french phrases are exactly the same,

You mean within post #194? That's perfectly normal; the example is good translation vs translation that leaves to be desired (of the same original).

If the question is more like "how come it's 'bienvenue à' when it's a city name, and 'bienvenue dans' when it's a different concept?", well, that's mostly how it is.

Would most Anglos be readily able to explain the difference between "I'm in Toronto" versus "I'm at Toronto" versus "I'm to Toronto" (and "I go in Toronto" vs "I go at Toronto" vs "I go to Toronto") beyond just saying "incorrect preposition" (which IMO sums it up) ...?