Alan (in Brussels) wrote:

IMHO the basic problem is that general English usage requires any
additional word(s) specifying which of various options applies to
precede the generic name (IOW: we say eg 'East Acton' rather than
'Acton East')

But we have Dagenham East, Hounslow West, Bromley South, Penge East, ...

I wonder whether the "East Acton" form is used where such a district
already existed, and the "Bromley South" form was a new term invented by
the railway. But where one such station exists, others with the same
town name seem to adopt the same order. Are there in fact any places
with both forms in use at different stations, e.g. (fictitious example)
Surbiton South and West Surbiton ?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Richard J. wrote:
Alan (in Brussels) wrote:

IMHO the basic problem is that general English usage requires any
additional word(s) specifying which of various options applies to
precede the generic name (IOW: we say eg 'East Acton' rather than
'Acton East')

But we have Dagenham East, Hounslow West, Bromley South, Penge East,
...

I wonder whether the "East Acton" form is used where such a district
already existed, and the "Bromley South" form was a new term invented
by the railway. But where one such station exists, others with the
same town name seem to adopt the same order. Are there in fact any
places with both forms in use at different stations, e.g. (fictitious
example) Surbiton South and West Surbiton ?

Acton Town & Acton Central plus North, South, East & West Acton (not
forgetting poor little Acton Main Line, just to keep the set complete :-) )

There are also the Ealings; North, South, West, Common and Broadway.

Piccadilly Pilot wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

Alan (in Brussels) wrote:


IMHO the basic problem is that general English usage requires any
additional word(s) specifying which of various options applies to
precede the generic name (IOW: we say eg 'East Acton' rather than
'Acton East')

But we have Dagenham East, Hounslow West, Bromley South, Penge East,
...

I wonder whether the "East Acton" form is used where such a district
already existed, and the "Bromley South" form was a new term invented
by the railway. But where one such station exists, others with the
same town name seem to adopt the same order. Are there in fact any
places with both forms in use at different stations, e.g. (fictitious
example) Surbiton South and West Surbiton ?


Acton Town & Acton Central plus North, South, East & West Acton (not
forgetting poor little Acton Main Line, just to keep the set complete :-) )

There are also the Ealings; North, South, West, Common and Broadway.

North Wembley but Wembley Central, Stadium & Park. East Finchley & West
Finchley, but Finchley Central. (Are there any "Central Something"
stations instead of "Something Central"?)


--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

In message , at 15:54:08 on Sun, 15 Aug
2004, Dave Arquati remarked:
(Are there any "Central Something" stations instead of "Something
Central"?)

Not according to:

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/realtime/fs_realtime.htm
--
Roland Perry

In the message : ...
Piccadilly Pilot wrote:
"Dave Arquati" write
Richard J. wrote:
Alan (in Brussels) wrote:


IMHO the basic problem is that general English usage requires any
additional word(s) specifying which of various options applies to
precede the generic name (IOW: we say eg 'East Acton' rather than
'Acton East')

But we have Dagenham East, Hounslow West, Bromley South, Penge East,
...

I wonder whether the "East Acton" form is used where such a district
already existed, and the "Bromley South" form was a new term invented
by the railway. But where one such station exists, others with the
same town name seem to adopt the same order. Are there in fact any
places with both forms in use at different stations, e.g. (fictitious
example) Surbiton South and West Surbiton ?


Acton Town & Acton Central plus North, South, East & West Acton (not
forgetting poor little Acton Main Line, just to keep the set complete
:-) )

There are also the Ealings; North, South, West, Common and Broadway.

North Wembley but Wembley Central, Stadium & Park. East Finchley & West
Finchley, but Finchley Central. (Are there any "Central Something"
stations instead of "Something Central"?)

No 'Central something' stations (not even a 'Central Park' somewhere?), but
plenty of 'Central something' thoroughfares: according to eg p. 293 (index)
of the 2000 OS/Philips London Street atlas there are 5 cases of 'Central
Avenue' in different postal districts and another 7 in named boroughs. Also
a similar frequency of 'Central Parade' as well as a sprinking of the usual
other types: Ct., Gdns., Rd., St., Way...

And that perhaps provides an alternative way of answering the OP's question:
the rule for street names in English is that the local identification (if
any) always precedes the type of throroughfare. Perhaps one day a new
station will take its name from the adjacent existing street, and then we'll
see which rules apply.

Regards,

- Alan (in Brussels - mind the spamtrap)

In article , (Alan \(in Brussels\)) wrote:

And that perhaps provides an alternative way of answering the OP's
question:
the rule for street names in English is that the local identification
(if any) always precedes the type of throroughfare.

A frequent exception to that is where a street has been split in two by
a new ring-road or the like. E.g. in Salisbury George St and George St
South, Meadow Rd and Meadow Rd South either side of A36 Churchill
Way, in Coventry Woodside and Wainbody Aves North and South
either side of A45 Kenpas Highway.

--
Peter Beale

In message , at 15:30:17 on Mon, 16
Aug 2004, "Alan (in Brussels)"
remarked:
No 'Central something' stations (not even a 'Central Park' somewhere?),

New York! "Central Park North (110st)" on the 2,3 (Red) line.

http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/nyct/maps/submap.htm
--
Roland Perry

"Alan":
No 'Central something' stations (not even a 'Central Park' somewhere?),

Roland Perry:
New York! "Central Park North (110st)" on the 2,3 (Red) line.

That is, by the way, a street name. Central Park is bounded by what,
in terms of the street grid, are 59th and 110th Streets and 5th and
8th Avenues; but the sections of 59th, 8th, and 110th that are adjacent
to the park are instead called Central Park South, West, and North
respectively. 5th Avenue keeps its name, though.
--
Mark Brader "Eventually, of course, I fell into the trap of
Toronto becoming comfortable with find(1)'s syntax..."
-- Steve Summit

My text in this article is in the public domain.

In message , at 15:24:32 on Mon, 16
Aug 2004, Mark Brader remarked:
New York! "Central Park North (110st)" on the 2,3 (Red) line.

That is, by the way, a street name.

As is High St Kensington. What an excellent symmetry.
--
Roland Perry

Alan (in Brussels) wrote:

No 'Central something' stations (not even a 'Central Park'
somewhere?), but plenty of 'Central something' thoroughfares:
according to eg p. 293 (index) of the 2000 OS/Philips London Street
atlas there are 5 cases of 'Central Avenue' in different postal
districts and another 7 in named boroughs. Also a similar frequency
of 'Central Parade' as well as a sprinking of the usual other types:
Ct., Gdns., Rd., St., Way...

And that perhaps provides an alternative way of answering the OP's
question: the rule for street names in English is that the local
identification (if any) always precedes the type of throroughfare.
Perhaps one day a new station will take its name from the adjacent
existing street, and then we'll see which rules apply.

Hmmm, which could have resulted in Queen's Drive East (instead of West
Acton) and Queen's Drive West (instead of North Ealing). :-)