Transition from "In <location name>" from "at <location name>

[NW Modeling List]

Matt
Good question. Never have given it a thought before. Maybe because a location would be AT a certain milepost or a specific point. The crossing frog AT Chillicothe is a known spot to a railroader. Using IN might be taken as a more generic location.I'm thinking that all the train orders I've copied or issued used AT.Have to ponder all this.
Jim Kehn 


-----Original Message-----
From: NW Modeling List via NW-Modeling-List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
To: nw modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Cc: NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Sent: Tue, May 30, 2023 2:26 pm
Subject: Transition from "In <location name>" from "at <location name>

My father has a fat library of literature and magazines from bygone days. I’ve noticed that railroaders at that time typically used “at” to reference cities / towns the railroad passed through - as in this example:
The eastbound crossing frog at Chillicothe with the Chillicothe Street Railway has been taken out and straight rails put in. 
If I wrote that sentence today, I would say “in Chillicothe”. 
When / why did that change? Or is that type of structure still used today on the railroads?
Matt GoodmanColumbus, Ohio, US________________________________________
NW-Modeling-List at nwhs.org
To change your subscription go to
http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-modeling-list
Browse the NW-Modeling-List archives at
http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/attachments/20230531/93b006c3/attachment.htm>