Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Jaywalking is good for cities

Expand Messages
  • ktsourl
    What remains usually unnoticed to natively english speakers is that there exist no corresponding to Jaywalk term in many (I think almost all - with the
    Message 1 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      What remains usually unnoticed to natively english speakers is that
      there exist no corresponding to "Jaywalk" term in many (I think almost
      all - with the exception of english) languages of the world, to
      denigrate a free, easygoing and unconcerned pedestrian behaviour. The
      formulation of the language is not a neutral process, but has deep
      implications to the way people interpret the world and create
      "obviousnesses" (consider G. Orwell's newspeak, or Sapir-Whorf
      hypothesis). Does a similar term exist for reckless driving?

      And of course Jaywalking is good for cities, as recent studies have
      proven - after all is the best large scale traffic calming procedure.
      It really helps to create safer environments for both pedestrians and
      car users, because of the slower velocities automobiles are obliged to
      run.

      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Simon Baddeley
      <s.j.baddeley@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > Dear All
      >
      > Perhaps now is a good time to have a go at editing the autocentric
      > Wikipedia entry on Jaywalking ­ and link it to the Carfree Cities entry:
      >
      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywalking
      >
      > Simon
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Simon Baddeley
      My understanding is that jaywalking was also used as a form of courageous dumb insolence in southern towns as a protest by non-car owning and segregated
      Message 2 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        My understanding is that "jaywalking" was also used as a form of courageous
        "dumb insolence" in southern towns as a protest by non-car owning and
        segregated Blacks versus car driving car owning Whites. Does anyone have the
        reference/s? It'd be good to put that in Wikipedia entry on "Jaywalking".

        Best

        S


        > From: ktsourl <ktsourl@...>
        > Reply-To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
        > Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 12:11:18 -0000
        > To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
        > Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: Jaywalking is good for cities
        >
        > What remains usually unnoticed to natively english speakers is that
        > there exist no corresponding to "Jaywalk" term in many (I think almost
        > all - with the exception of english) languages of the world, to
        > denigrate a free, easygoing and unconcerned pedestrian behaviour. The
        > formulation of the language is not a neutral process,
      • J.H. Crawford
        ... It s important to be clear that jaywalking implies a violation of a traffic law. If there are crosswalks, the law says you are obliged to use them. If
        Message 3 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          >What remains usually unnoticed to natively english speakers is that
          >there exist no corresponding to "Jaywalk" term in many (I think almost
          >all - with the exception of english) languages of the world, to
          >denigrate a free, easygoing and unconcerned pedestrian behaviour.

          It's important to be clear that jaywalking implies a violation
          of a traffic law. If there are crosswalks, the law says you
          are obliged to use them. If there are none, then you may
          cross where you please, and you are therefore not jaywalking.

          >The
          >formulation of the language is not a neutral process, but has deep
          >implications to the way people interpret the world and create
          >"obviousnesses" (consider G. Orwell's newspeak, or Sapir-Whorf
          >hypothesis). Does a similar term exist for reckless driving?

          If jaywalking as a lexical concept originates in US English
          (I am not sure), then it implies that the US was the first
          place to criminalize what had until then been normal behavior.
          That would have arisen because the US was the first place
          where there were enough cars for the issue to arise.

          >And of course Jaywalking is good for cities, as recent studies have
          >proven - after all is the best large scale traffic calming procedure.

          Well, the best large-scale traffic calming procedure is
          to put up barriers to cars and keep them out entirely.




          ----- ### -----
          J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
          mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
        • Carlos F. Pardo SUTP
          What is the origin of the word jaywalking ? Original source: http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutwordorigins/jaywalking The complete Oxford
          Message 4 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            "What is the origin of the word 'jaywalking'?
            Original source:
            http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutwordorigins/jaywalking

            The complete Oxford English Dictionary traces the word jaywalker back to
            1917 and labels it 'originally US'. There is a cross-reference to the word
            jay, which has a number of slang senses. The relevant one is 'a stupid or
            dull person, a simpleton. Also (as adjective) dull, unsophisticated;
            inferior, poor'. This is labelled 'US colloquial', and there is evidence of
            use from 1900. So persons who stupidly ignored traffic regulations were
            given (in Boston, it seems) this compact name."

            This is a great discussion. I think there must be other terms in the
            US-english strictly related to auto-centric views, which are not found in
            other languages. I fully agree with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Language
            constructs reality. Thanks for the comment!

            Best regards,

            Carlos F. Pardo



            -----Original Message-----
            From: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com [mailto:carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com]
            On Behalf Of Simon Baddeley
            Sent: Viernes, 03 de Marzo de 2006 07:18 a.m.
            To: Carfree Cities
            Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Re: Jaywalking is good for cities

            My understanding is that "jaywalking" was also used as a form of courageous
            "dumb insolence" in southern towns as a protest by non-car owning and
            segregated Blacks versus car driving car owning Whites. Does anyone have the
            reference/s? It'd be good to put that in Wikipedia entry on "Jaywalking".

            Best

            S


            > From: ktsourl <ktsourl@...>
            > Reply-To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
            > Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 12:11:18 -0000
            > To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
            > Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: Jaywalking is good for cities
            >
            > What remains usually unnoticed to natively english speakers is that
            > there exist no corresponding to "Jaywalk" term in many (I think almost
            > all - with the exception of english) languages of the world, to
            > denigrate a free, easygoing and unconcerned pedestrian behaviour. The
            > formulation of the language is not a neutral process,





            Yahoo! Groups Links
          • Todd Edelman
            carlos.pardo@sutp.org wrote: ... I fully agree with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Language ... Or does it really, CARlos...? ;-p - T ... Todd Edelman
            Message 5 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              carlos.pardo@... wrote:

              "... I fully agree with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Language
              > constructs reality..."

              Or does it really, CARlos...? ;-p

              - T


              ------------------------------------------------------

              Todd Edelman
              International Coordinator
              On the Train Towards the Future!

              Green Idea Factory
              Laubova 5
              CZ-13000 Praha 3

              ++420 605 915 970

              edelman@...
              http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain

              Green Idea Factory,
              a member of World Carfree Network
            • Carlos F. Pardo SUTP
              Sorry for this quick email regarding my name s meaning... Once I was in a lunch in Thailand, and a guy told me that my name meant Car- loss... no more cars!
              Message 6 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Sorry for this quick email regarding my name's meaning... Once I was in a
                lunch in Thailand, and a guy told me that my name meant Car- loss... no more
                cars!

                Carlos F. Pardo



                -----Original Message-----
                From: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com [mailto:carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com]
                On Behalf Of Todd Edelman
                Sent: Viernes, 03 de Marzo de 2006 09:05 a.m.
                To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [carfree_cities] Re: Jaywalking is good for cities

                carlos.pardo@... wrote:

                "... I fully agree with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Language
                > constructs reality..."

                Or does it really, CARlos...? ;-p

                - T


                ------------------------------------------------------

                Todd Edelman
                International Coordinator
                On the Train Towards the Future!

                Green Idea Factory
                Laubova 5
                CZ-13000 Praha 3

                ++420 605 915 970

                edelman@...
                http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain

                Green Idea Factory,
                a member of World Carfree Network




                Yahoo! Groups Links
              • Simon Baddeley
                The idea of segregation suggested here worries me, but then I am keen on the naked street as the next best to no cars at all.
                Message 7 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  The idea of segregation suggested here worries me, but then I am keen on the
                  "naked street" as the next best to no cars at all.

                  http://www.conwyctc.fsnet.co.uk/pages/safe_rds.htm

                  Simon


                  > Well, the best large-scale traffic calming procedure is
                  > to put up barriers to cars and keep them out entirely.
                • Richard Risemberg
                  ... In California, you may cross anywhere, crosswalk or not, UNLESS the street has signals at both ends of the block you re on, in which case you must use
                  Message 8 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Mar 3, 2006, at 4:41 AM, J.H. Crawford wrote:

                    > It's important to be clear that jaywalking implies a violation
                    > of a traffic law. If there are crosswalks, the law says you
                    > are obliged to use them. If there are none, then you may
                    > cross where you please, and you are therefore not jaywalking.
                    In California, you may cross anywhere, crosswalk or not, UNLESS the
                    street has signals at both ends of the block you're on, in which case
                    you must use crosswalks.

                    My street has such signals, but I jaywalk anyway. Every single day.

                    Rick
                    --
                    Richard Risemberg
                    http://www.rickrise.com
                    http://www.newcolonist.com
                    http://www.living-room.org
                  • Doug Salzmann
                    ... That s incorrect, at least in most North American jurisdictions. First, it is a common misconception that paint creates crosswalks. It does not.
                    Message 9 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > It's important to be clear that jaywalking implies a violation
                      > of a traffic law. If there are crosswalks, the law says you
                      > are obliged to use them. If there are none, then you may
                      > cross where you please, and you are therefore not jaywalking.

                      That's incorrect, at least in most North American jurisdictions.

                      First, it is a common misconception that paint creates crosswalks. It
                      does not.

                      "Crosswalk" is typically defined as an extension of the sidewalk,
                      shoulder, or whatever pedestrian R.O.W. there may be, across an
                      intersection of roadways. The crosswalk thus exists, and the associated
                      rights and obligations of pedestrians, drivers, etc. apply, whether it is
                      marked (painted) or not.

                      Second, mid-block crossings are generally perfectly legal, with the
                      proviso that crossing pedestrians must yield to auto traffic before
                      beginning to cross. The main exception is between two signalized
                      (traffic-light controlled) intersections, where such crossings are
                      usually prohibited.

                      As this should make clear, "jaywalking" is pretty meaningless as a legal
                      term.

                      All of the foregoing is subject to the variable provisions of local
                      ordinances, of course.


                      > >And of course Jaywalking is good for cities, as recent studies have
                      > >proven - after all is the best large scale traffic calming procedure.
                      >
                      > Well, the best large-scale traffic calming procedure is
                      > to put up barriers to cars and keep them out entirely.

                      Yes, indeed. And, THAT is the subject of this list, isn't it?


                      -Doug
                    • J.H. Crawford
                      ... and reality constructs language ... J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities mailbox@carfree.com
                      Message 10 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        >This is a great discussion. I think there must be other terms in the
                        >US-english strictly related to auto-centric views, which are not found in
                        >other languages. I fully agree with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Language
                        >constructs reality. Thanks for the comment!

                        and reality constructs language


                        ----- ### -----
                        J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                        mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
                      • Simon Baddeley
                        So can I ask again whether you are comfortable with the Wikipedia entry on jaywalking ?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywalking It seems that it might be
                        Message 11 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          So can I ask again whether you are comfortable with the Wikipedia entry on
                          "jaywalking"?:

                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywalking

                          It seems that it might be reasonable to edit in a few sentences at the end
                          of the paragraph headed "Driver cooperation" where reference might be made
                          to mutual cooperation among ALL road users as encouraged by "naked streets"
                          - and indeed give a link to examples of this idea which has behind it the
                          idea of no traffic exceeding 17mph in order to allow negotiation between
                          different road users via eye contact.

                          QUOTE: To disrobe a street, you remove all the conventional methods of
                          controlling vehicles and keeping them separate from pedestrians. Traffic
                          lights, barriers, signs, curbs, and pedestrian crossings are all taken out.
                          The idea behind it is to make the road space less predictable. Instead of
                          drivers being able to rely on road markings and charge along on the
                          assumption that pedestrians are all corralled safely out of the way, they
                          will have to continually interact with people, make decisions about how fast
                          to drive and generally take more responsibility for their actions. London is
                          trying the idea in Exhibition Road, Kensington, in which some of the
                          capital¹s biggest museums are sited. The idea sounds extraordinary, so much
                          so that the British tabloid newspaper the Sun wrote in an editorial: ³Have
                          you ever, in your whole life, heard of anything more stupid? Apparently the
                          idea was conceived in Holland, where everyone is on drugs and drives slowly
                          anyway.² It was indeed pioneered in the Netherlands, but by the soberest of
                          traffic planners, who claim success in significantly reducing accidents.

                          The concept of the naked street was spearheaded by the Netherlands, where
                          traffic lights and markings have been stripped from several junctions in
                          recent years.
                          [Denver Post, 14 Feb. 2005]


                          In the Danish city of Christiansfeld, a busy intersection known for traffic
                          jams and accidents was given the naked street treatment four years ago.
                          Since then, there have been no fatal accidents.
                          [Australian, 10 Feb. 2005]


                          Best

                          Simon


                          > From: "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...>
                          > Reply-To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                          > Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 16:57:45 +0000
                          > To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: RE: [carfree_cities] Re: Jaywalking is good for cities
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >> This is a great discussion. I think there must be other terms in the
                          >> US-english strictly related to auto-centric views, which are not found in
                          >> other languages. I fully agree with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Language
                          >> constructs reality. Thanks for the comment!
                          >
                          > and reality constructs language
                          >
                          >
                          > ----- ### -----
                          > J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                          > mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                        • Lloyd Wright
                          One small suggestion regarding naked streets . The person attributed with developing the idea, Hans Monderman, tends to use the term shared space rather
                          Message 12 of 13 , Mar 3, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            One small suggestion regarding "naked streets". The person attributed with
                            developing the idea, Hans Monderman, tends to use the term "shared space"
                            rather than "naked streets". I think that "shared space" is probably a
                            slightly more marketable name. I have also heard it called "post traffic
                            calming" and "third-generation traffic calming". However, it seems that the
                            people who have worked hard to make the concept a reality seem to prefer
                            "shared space". There is a Wikipedia entry for shared space, if anyone is
                            interested:

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_space

                            Best,

                            Lloyd

                            ------ Original Message ------
                            Received: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 12:17:02 PM EST
                            From: Simon Baddeley <s.j.baddeley@...>
                            To: Carfree Cities <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                            Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Re: Jaywalking is good for cities

                            of the paragraph headed "Driver cooperation" where reference might be made to
                            mutual cooperation among ALL road users as encouraged by "naked streets" - and
                            indeed give a link to examples of this idea which has behind it the idea of no
                            traffic exceeding 17mph in order to allow negotiation between different road
                            users via eye contact.
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.