[Grammar] have your rain gear ready (for)

[kadioguy]

(On a sign, in a subway station)

It is raining outside, please have your rain gear ready for when you leave the station.

----
Is that "for" necessary? I think it would also be correct and clear enough, to omit the "for".

What do you think? (If I'm wrong, could you tell why?)
---
(Source)

 

[emsr2d2]

If you have something ready for a specific time, it means you have it ready in advance. There's no point getting your rain gear ready when you leave the station - you'll already be wet! You need to get it ready while you're still inside, in the dry.

Note that the sign is poorly punctuated. There should be a semi-colon after "outside", not a comma. They've created a run-on sentence.

 

[kadioguy]

If you have something ready for a specific time, it means you have it ready in advance. There's no point getting your rain gear ready when you leave the station - you'll already be wet! You need to get it ready while you're still inside, in the dry. [...]

So, do you mean that it is correct to say "please have your rain gear ready for when you leave the station"? Because it's "have something ready for a specific time (i.e., for when you leave the station)".

Do I understand it correctly?

 

[GoesStation]

So, do you mean that it is correct to say "please have your rain gear ready for when you leave the station"? Because it's "have something ready for a specific time (i.e., for when you leave the station)".

Do I understand it correctly?

Yes.

 

[jutfrank]

I disagree with what I think emsr2d2 is saying in post #2. The verb have means that both with and without for, the idea is the same—your rain gear is ready in advance of leaving the station. If the verb were get, then without for, it would mean that the person gets his/her gear ready at the moment of leaving the station.

Also, I don't think your question of for being 'necessary' is a good one. It isn't a question of necessity. It's a question of identifying the differences in meaning between the versions with and without for. That's what you should ask us.

Here's my answer:

a) ... have your rain gear ready when you leave the station

= at the moment of leaving the station, make sure your rain gear is in a state of readiness. The phrase when you leave the station is a time phrase expressing the time of having your rain gear ready.

b) ... have your rain gear ready for when you leave the station

= at a moment prior to leaving the station, make sure your rain gear is ready for the future event of leaving the station. The phrase when you leave the station is the event which you're asked to be ready for.

 

[kadioguy]

[...] The verb have means that both with and without for, the idea is the same—your rain gear is ready in advance of leaving the station. If the verb were get, then without for, it would mean that the person gets his/her gear ready at the moment of leaving the station.

[...]

Here's my answer:

a) ... have your rain gear ready when you leave the station

= at the moment of leaving the station, make sure your rain gear is in a state of readiness. The phrase when you leave the station is a time phrase expressing the time of having your rain gear ready.

b) ... have your rain gear ready for when you leave the station

= at a moment prior to leaving the station, make sure your rain gear is ready for the future event of leaving the station. The phrase when you leave the station is the event which you're asked to be ready for.

You say:

The verb have means that both with and without for, the idea is the same—your rain gear is ready in advance of leaving the station.

And say:

a) ... have your rain gear ready when you leave the station

= at the moment of leaving the station

b) ... have your rain gear ready for when you leave the station

= at a moment prior to leaving the station

Then say:

If the verb were get, then without for, it would mean that the person gets his/her gear ready at the moment of leaving the station.
---
It seems that (a) and (b) are not the same, but you say the idea is the same. However, (a) and the "get" version seem the same.

Have I missed something? :-?

 

[tedmc]

To me, "when" (without "for") or " prior to" (with "for") in this case amount to the same thing, i.e. before one steps out of the station. I don't think there is a need to distinguish or emphasize exactly when one is to get the rain gear ready.

 

[Rover_KE]

Do Taiwanese railway authorities really find it necessary to give their citizens and tourists such warnings?

The sign seems to me as unnecessary as one saying 'It's raining out there but don't put your umbrellas up until you leave the station'.

 

[emsr2d2]

With a different context, the use of "for" is more important.

Make sure you have your accounts ready for when you meet with the accountant. (This clearly involves more forward planning. The person isn't going to be able to get the necessary paperwork ready right at the start of the meeting.)

 

[kadioguy]

Do Taiwanese railway authorities really find it necessary to give their citizens and tourists such warnings?

The sign seems to me as unnecessary as one saying 'It's raining out there but don't put your umbrellas up until you leave the station'.

It's a kind notice to me. I could take my umbrella out of my backpack when seeing that in the passage, rather than to do so at the time when I am ready to walk out the exit. Preparing in advance is always good.

 

[jutfrank]

Have I missed something? :-?

I apparently didn't explain things very well. My point was that there's a difference in meaning if you remove for. The sentence as it is uses pattern b) below. If you remove it, you'll be changing the pattern to a):

a) ready [at a certain time]
b) ready for something

What I think you may be missing is that in the original sentence, the phrase when you leave the station should be understood as 'something' (an event), not as a time.

However, in this particular context, the effective meaning is the same, which means that the notice has the same effect whether you add for or not.

 

[GoesStation]

Do Taiwanese railway authorities really find it necessary to give their citizens and tourists such warnings?

The sign seems to me as unnecessary as one saying 'It's raining out there but don't put your umbrellas up until you leave the station'.

I think they're trying to prevent people from piling up at the exit by encouraging them to get ready sooner.