Better alternatives to “Save me!” - meaning to save electricity

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;







up vote
15
down vote

favorite
2












There is a sign on the light switch at a bilingual school to encourage students to switch off the lights when not in use and help save energy:




Save me!




enter image description here



Translating "Save me!" to Slovak, would be:




save me => zachráň ma




Which sounds correct, meaning "save me from [something]".



Google Translate gives the below for the correct Slovak term as in "save electricity", I guess that is how school decided to use "Save me!" on the switches:




šetrí ma => save me




This doesn't sound right to me, but I cannot think of any other better alternative that is short and concise enough that would fit on a switch button.



Update: I will contact the school, and see what option they prefer. Then accept the answer accordingly. Thank you for all the answers/comments.






meaning expressions phrase-requests synonyms translation







share|improve this question



















  • 2




    Do you want single-word alternatives for 'save me!'? And do you want English alternatives or Slovak ones?
    – Ahmed
    2 days ago







  • 9




    I think the sign maker was being a bit playful here, and meant to evoke both meanings in the mind of the reader...
    – colmde
    2 days ago






  • 5




    @zx8754 - even if it was unintentional 'Save me!' is very good: the idea that energy should not be wasted and is also a finite resource.
    – Dan
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @Dan It is quite possible that it is the only good option. But if I hear someone scream "Save me!" I would assume someone is in trouble and needs help. In this case, switch is not in trouble and doesn't need saving from anything, it is just doing its job: switch lights on/off. Somehow being "off" is more preferable to the switch.
    – zx8754
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @LightnessRacesinOrbit Sorry, a bit lost, what are you referring to as "This"?
    – zx8754
    2 days ago
















up vote
15
down vote

favorite
2












There is a sign on the light switch at a bilingual school to encourage students to switch off the lights when not in use and help save energy:




Save me!




enter image description here



Translating "Save me!" to Slovak, would be:




save me => zachráň ma




Which sounds correct, meaning "save me from [something]".



Google Translate gives the below for the correct Slovak term as in "save electricity", I guess that is how school decided to use "Save me!" on the switches:




šetrí ma => save me




This doesn't sound right to me, but I cannot think of any other better alternative that is short and concise enough that would fit on a switch button.



Update: I will contact the school, and see what option they prefer. Then accept the answer accordingly. Thank you for all the answers/comments.






meaning expressions phrase-requests synonyms translation







share|improve this question



















  • 2




    Do you want single-word alternatives for 'save me!'? And do you want English alternatives or Slovak ones?
    – Ahmed
    2 days ago







  • 9




    I think the sign maker was being a bit playful here, and meant to evoke both meanings in the mind of the reader...
    – colmde
    2 days ago






  • 5




    @zx8754 - even if it was unintentional 'Save me!' is very good: the idea that energy should not be wasted and is also a finite resource.
    – Dan
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @Dan It is quite possible that it is the only good option. But if I hear someone scream "Save me!" I would assume someone is in trouble and needs help. In this case, switch is not in trouble and doesn't need saving from anything, it is just doing its job: switch lights on/off. Somehow being "off" is more preferable to the switch.
    – zx8754
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @LightnessRacesinOrbit Sorry, a bit lost, what are you referring to as "This"?
    – zx8754
    2 days ago












up vote
15
down vote

favorite
2









up vote
15
down vote

favorite
2






2





There is a sign on the light switch at a bilingual school to encourage students to switch off the lights when not in use and help save energy:




Save me!




enter image description here



Translating "Save me!" to Slovak, would be:




save me => zachráň ma




Which sounds correct, meaning "save me from [something]".



Google Translate gives the below for the correct Slovak term as in "save electricity", I guess that is how school decided to use "Save me!" on the switches:




šetrí ma => save me




This doesn't sound right to me, but I cannot think of any other better alternative that is short and concise enough that would fit on a switch button.



Update: I will contact the school, and see what option they prefer. Then accept the answer accordingly. Thank you for all the answers/comments.






meaning expressions phrase-requests synonyms translation







share|improve this question















There is a sign on the light switch at a bilingual school to encourage students to switch off the lights when not in use and help save energy:




Save me!




enter image description here



Translating "Save me!" to Slovak, would be:




save me => zachráň ma




Which sounds correct, meaning "save me from [something]".



Google Translate gives the below for the correct Slovak term as in "save electricity", I guess that is how school decided to use "Save me!" on the switches:




šetrí ma => save me




This doesn't sound right to me, but I cannot think of any other better alternative that is short and concise enough that would fit on a switch button.



Update: I will contact the school, and see what option they prefer. Then accept the answer accordingly. Thank you for all the answers/comments.






meaning expressions phrase-requests synonyms translation




meaning expressions phrase-requests synonyms translation






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 5 hours ago









Azor Ahai

3,04121132




3,04121132










asked 2 days ago









zx8754

19619




19619







  • 2




    Do you want single-word alternatives for 'save me!'? And do you want English alternatives or Slovak ones?
    – Ahmed
    2 days ago







  • 9




    I think the sign maker was being a bit playful here, and meant to evoke both meanings in the mind of the reader...
    – colmde
    2 days ago






  • 5




    @zx8754 - even if it was unintentional 'Save me!' is very good: the idea that energy should not be wasted and is also a finite resource.
    – Dan
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @Dan It is quite possible that it is the only good option. But if I hear someone scream "Save me!" I would assume someone is in trouble and needs help. In this case, switch is not in trouble and doesn't need saving from anything, it is just doing its job: switch lights on/off. Somehow being "off" is more preferable to the switch.
    – zx8754
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @LightnessRacesinOrbit Sorry, a bit lost, what are you referring to as "This"?
    – zx8754
    2 days ago












  • 2




    Do you want single-word alternatives for 'save me!'? And do you want English alternatives or Slovak ones?
    – Ahmed
    2 days ago







  • 9




    I think the sign maker was being a bit playful here, and meant to evoke both meanings in the mind of the reader...
    – colmde
    2 days ago






  • 5




    @zx8754 - even if it was unintentional 'Save me!' is very good: the idea that energy should not be wasted and is also a finite resource.
    – Dan
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @Dan It is quite possible that it is the only good option. But if I hear someone scream "Save me!" I would assume someone is in trouble and needs help. In this case, switch is not in trouble and doesn't need saving from anything, it is just doing its job: switch lights on/off. Somehow being "off" is more preferable to the switch.
    – zx8754
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @LightnessRacesinOrbit Sorry, a bit lost, what are you referring to as "This"?
    – zx8754
    2 days ago







2




2




Do you want single-word alternatives for 'save me!'? And do you want English alternatives or Slovak ones?
– Ahmed
2 days ago





Do you want single-word alternatives for 'save me!'? And do you want English alternatives or Slovak ones?
– Ahmed
2 days ago





9




9




I think the sign maker was being a bit playful here, and meant to evoke both meanings in the mind of the reader...
– colmde
2 days ago




I think the sign maker was being a bit playful here, and meant to evoke both meanings in the mind of the reader...
– colmde
2 days ago




5




5




@zx8754 - even if it was unintentional 'Save me!' is very good: the idea that energy should not be wasted and is also a finite resource.
– Dan
2 days ago




@zx8754 - even if it was unintentional 'Save me!' is very good: the idea that energy should not be wasted and is also a finite resource.
– Dan
2 days ago




2




2




@Dan It is quite possible that it is the only good option. But if I hear someone scream "Save me!" I would assume someone is in trouble and needs help. In this case, switch is not in trouble and doesn't need saving from anything, it is just doing its job: switch lights on/off. Somehow being "off" is more preferable to the switch.
– zx8754
2 days ago




@Dan It is quite possible that it is the only good option. But if I hear someone scream "Save me!" I would assume someone is in trouble and needs help. In this case, switch is not in trouble and doesn't need saving from anything, it is just doing its job: switch lights on/off. Somehow being "off" is more preferable to the switch.
– zx8754
2 days ago




2




2




@LightnessRacesinOrbit Sorry, a bit lost, what are you referring to as "This"?
– zx8754
2 days ago




@LightnessRacesinOrbit Sorry, a bit lost, what are you referring to as "This"?
– zx8754
2 days ago










9 Answers
9






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
46
down vote













I suppose conserve would be a more correct (or at least less ambiguous) term for what's meant.



But as I said in the comment, "Save me!" is a bit funnier and draws your attention as it personifies the electricity (or the light switch) a little, like it's asking for your help as well as asking you to save electricity.






share|improve this answer
















  • 1




    Yeah, [conserve] would be a bit dull and more confusing than helpful. But "Save me" still doesn't makes sense, even if we imagine switch is talking to us: "save me (from what?)".
    – zx8754
    2 days ago






  • 5




    Save doesn't have to mean saving/rescuing from something. It also means, in this instance, preserve/don't use. So 'Don't use me' would mean the same thing.
    – user2397282
    2 days ago






  • 3




    Just conserve on its own would be a bit strange. Conserve energy would be better—and is often seen.
    – Jason Bassford
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @user2397282 Except that “Don't use me” sounds like a mandate. I would put that label on a switch which should not be operated — though I would be more likely to disconnect whatever piece of equipment I didn't want operated, or to hang one of my red Danger tags on it.
    – can-ned_food
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @NigelTouch So, shouldn't it be a little Earth with a face, or maybe an image of the overworked generator or turbine oh so far away? Even so, maybe “protect me” or “don't waste me” would be better.
    – can-ned_food
    2 days ago


















up vote
20
down vote













Save me is fine because it does not necessarily only mean to save something or someone from something.



If you look at the Oxford Dictionaries Online definitions for save, you'll see five definitions including the following:




Keep safe or rescue (someone or something) from harm or danger.



  • ‘they brought him in to help save the club from bankruptcy’



The definition above fits the save from context



The definition relevant to the save electricity context is actually:




Preserve (something) by not expending or using it.



  • ‘save your strength till later’






share|improve this answer


















  • 4




    Probably the most common example of the last use would be save money. For example, "I'm saving [my money] for a new computer".
    – TripeHound
    2 days ago







  • 1




    Correct. And they slapped it on that switch because it's an electric switch.
    – RonJohn
    10 hours ago

















up vote
15
down vote













I would say "save me" is fine in English. It ends up as somewhat of a pun, which doesn't translate well and might have been unintentional, but I don't think that detracts from the message.



It's common in English to talk about "saving electricity" or saving some other resource like money. This is listed as definition 4 of Save on dictionary.com:




to avoid the spending, consumption, or waste of




This works fairly well, and is extremely common in English. The only point for potential confusion is that the label is on a switch, so it could come across more as "save the light switch" rather than "save electricity". This is also where the double-meaning comes in; this interpretation invokes definition 1 or 2 instead:




  1. to rescue from danger or possible harm, injury, or loss

  2. to keep safe, intact, or unhurt; safeguard; preserve



In this context, the object is being personified and asking for help in some way. "Save me!" without any indication as to what they might need saving from is perfectly acceptable in English, though it does imply that there is some kind of danger that exists.



For a fluent English speaker, I think "Save me!" is fine and the dual interpretations are likely to be clear enough to understand, while the slight pun and personification will make the message more memorable and eye-catching. However, since the message is intended for a "bilingual school" it's possible that the double-meaning will be more confusing than it is worth. An alternative would be the more unambiguous "Save electricity!" which dodges the second meaning arising from "me". A shorter version could be "Save power"; it seems awkward to me, but it's comprehensible enough.






share|improve this answer



























    up vote
    10
    down vote













    You could better come up with the most precis option: Save Energy! or you can say "Save Power!."




    Example poster image from previews.123rf.com:



    save energy poster







    share|improve this answer


















    • 4




      I agree that this is the best option, but I think it could do with some more explanation as to why. The reason being that in "save me" stuck to a light switch, the "me" is the light switch. We don't want to save the light switch, we want to save energy/electricity. The intention of the current note is relatively clear from the context, but it's not colloquial, and schools generally aim to teach idiomatic phrases when teaching languages.
      – AndyT
      13 hours ago

















    up vote
    7
    down vote













    What about "Switch off!" or "Turn off!" ?






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.













    • 3




      I like this option, but it sounds more like a command, than a kind request.
      – zx8754
      2 days ago






    • 3




      @zx8754 "Please turn off"?! ;)
      – MrWhite
      14 hours ago


















    up vote
    5
    down vote













    How about phrasing it as a request or mandate in the negative?




    Do not waste me!

    Don't waste me!




    ‘Waste’ here being the transitive form of the verb rather than the uncountable noun — the noun which is synonymic with ‘rubbish’, ‘trash’, ‘refuse’, ‘garbage’, or what–have–you.

    You could also say




    Don't squander me!




    And, perhaps you should, because that word — from my experience — isn't often heard or read except in certain contexts: some people may not be readily familiar with the word, or may think it quaint, but either one will attract attention and shouldn't obfuscate the sentence unless the person is almost illiterate in English or has a very small English vocabulary. I think most English–speaking people are aware of the word ‘squander’ and what it conveys.



    The added benefit with my recommendation is that it accommodates use — you can use it, but don't waste it. Of course, so too does the conserve one.






    share|improve this answer




















    • Yes, but the abbreviated form.
      – Lambie
      yesterday

















    up vote
    5
    down vote













    There was an energy conservation campaign a while back that used the slogan




    Save a watt!




    another slogan used the phrase




    Kill a watt!




    The literal meaning is clear and this is also a pun of the word "kilowatt" which is part of the most common unit in which energy usage is billed by utilities, the kilowatt hour.






    share|improve this answer





























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      The word "save" frames the problem as if there is a fixed amount of energy that must be allocated efficiently over time -- "save it now, and you can use it later". Efficiently "saving" energy that is already on the power grid is not really an option with current technology, from what I understand. Instead, I guess the environmental goal is to reduce the amount of energy that is produced in the first place.



      You could use "waste not", short for "waste not, want not", defined in Wiktionary as...




      (idiomatic) If one is not wasteful then one will not be in need.




      This idiom is usually for individuals and households, but it can also apply to us all collectively in the context of energy usage, like...




      If we don't produce more energy than we need, there will be plenty.




      Here, "plenty" can refer to not only energy, but also other resources (through externalities).






      share|improve this answer
















      • 2




        You seem to be assuming that save connotes gradual accumulation (or at least, reduced expenditure) of a limited resource now for the specific purpose of having a larger quantity of that resource available for use at a later time. But that's not necessarily so; the verb save can also mean simply to minimize waste. For example, this is the difference between saving money for an intended future purchase, and saving money by taking advantage of discounts when shopping.
        – jdmc
        yesterday










      • @jdmc I think that the "saving by" example still implies the "saving for" interpretation. Whether I'm saving money, time, space, CPU cycles or my own mental or physical energy, the implication is that I have this resource and am saving it instead of wasting it, and that I am saving it because it can be put to other uses.
        – Frank
        yesterday






      • 2




        Not sure if this is what you meant, but in your example, if I cannot afford a purchase without taking advantage of the discount (eg, I have $20, the price is $30 without the discount and $10 with), then I think "saving money" is not correct there either -- I cannot save what I do not have.
        – Frank
        yesterday










      • @Frank saving money is absolutely correct there, independant of whether you can afford it without the discount. You are SPENDING LESS, which is one of the definitions of save on the oxford dictionary.
        – Aethenosity
        8 hours ago










      • @Aethenosity After "spending less" implicitly comes "than you would have spent otherwise", which is not meaningful if the counterfactual where you spend more is infeasible (since you could not have afforded it). That's my reading of the word, anyways -- that you can only save things that exist. (I may lay off replying soon. The OP suggested I post this answer; and I fear that I'm not saying anything new in the comments here now.)
        – Frank
        7 hours ago

















      up vote
      2
      down vote













      I think the intent is to say 'Don't forget to switch off after use'. A version of 'Don't waste energy/me' or a lengthier command "Switch off after use' are viable alternatives. I think you have to work with the space constraint of the switch size but depending on how important clear instruction needs to be, you can use 'save power', 'save earth', 'save life', 'use judiciously'.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.

















      • Thanks, already got many good alternatives, yes the space is the issue here.
        – zx8754
        4 hours ago










      Your Answer







      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "97"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: false,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463769%2fbetter-alternatives-to-save-me-meaning-to-save-electricity%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest

















      9 Answers
      9






      active

      oldest

      votes








      9 Answers
      9






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      46
      down vote













      I suppose conserve would be a more correct (or at least less ambiguous) term for what's meant.



      But as I said in the comment, "Save me!" is a bit funnier and draws your attention as it personifies the electricity (or the light switch) a little, like it's asking for your help as well as asking you to save electricity.






      share|improve this answer
















      • 1




        Yeah, [conserve] would be a bit dull and more confusing than helpful. But "Save me" still doesn't makes sense, even if we imagine switch is talking to us: "save me (from what?)".
        – zx8754
        2 days ago






      • 5




        Save doesn't have to mean saving/rescuing from something. It also means, in this instance, preserve/don't use. So 'Don't use me' would mean the same thing.
        – user2397282
        2 days ago






      • 3




        Just conserve on its own would be a bit strange. Conserve energy would be better—and is often seen.
        – Jason Bassford
        2 days ago






      • 1




        @user2397282 Except that “Don't use me” sounds like a mandate. I would put that label on a switch which should not be operated — though I would be more likely to disconnect whatever piece of equipment I didn't want operated, or to hang one of my red Danger tags on it.
        – can-ned_food
        2 days ago






      • 1




        @NigelTouch So, shouldn't it be a little Earth with a face, or maybe an image of the overworked generator or turbine oh so far away? Even so, maybe “protect me” or “don't waste me” would be better.
        – can-ned_food
        2 days ago















      up vote
      46
      down vote













      I suppose conserve would be a more correct (or at least less ambiguous) term for what's meant.



      But as I said in the comment, "Save me!" is a bit funnier and draws your attention as it personifies the electricity (or the light switch) a little, like it's asking for your help as well as asking you to save electricity.






      share|improve this answer
















      • 1




        Yeah, [conserve] would be a bit dull and more confusing than helpful. But "Save me" still doesn't makes sense, even if we imagine switch is talking to us: "save me (from what?)".
        – zx8754
        2 days ago






      • 5




        Save doesn't have to mean saving/rescuing from something. It also means, in this instance, preserve/don't use. So 'Don't use me' would mean the same thing.
        – user2397282
        2 days ago






      • 3




        Just conserve on its own would be a bit strange. Conserve energy would be better—and is often seen.
        – Jason Bassford
        2 days ago






      • 1




        @user2397282 Except that “Don't use me” sounds like a mandate. I would put that label on a switch which should not be operated — though I would be more likely to disconnect whatever piece of equipment I didn't want operated, or to hang one of my red Danger tags on it.
        – can-ned_food
        2 days ago






      • 1




        @NigelTouch So, shouldn't it be a little Earth with a face, or maybe an image of the overworked generator or turbine oh so far away? Even so, maybe “protect me” or “don't waste me” would be better.
        – can-ned_food
        2 days ago













      up vote
      46
      down vote










      up vote
      46
      down vote









      I suppose conserve would be a more correct (or at least less ambiguous) term for what's meant.



      But as I said in the comment, "Save me!" is a bit funnier and draws your attention as it personifies the electricity (or the light switch) a little, like it's asking for your help as well as asking you to save electricity.






      share|improve this answer












      I suppose conserve would be a more correct (or at least less ambiguous) term for what's meant.



      But as I said in the comment, "Save me!" is a bit funnier and draws your attention as it personifies the electricity (or the light switch) a little, like it's asking for your help as well as asking you to save electricity.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 2 days ago









      colmde

      790410




      790410







      • 1




        Yeah, [conserve] would be a bit dull and more confusing than helpful. But "Save me" still doesn't makes sense, even if we imagine switch is talking to us: "save me (from what?)".
        – zx8754
        2 days ago






      • 5




        Save doesn't have to mean saving/rescuing from something. It also means, in this instance, preserve/don't use. So 'Don't use me' would mean the same thing.
        – user2397282
        2 days ago






      • 3




        Just conserve on its own would be a bit strange. Conserve energy would be better—and is often seen.
        – Jason Bassford
        2 days ago






      • 1




        @user2397282 Except that “Don't use me” sounds like a mandate. I would put that label on a switch which should not be operated — though I would be more likely to disconnect whatever piece of equipment I didn't want operated, or to hang one of my red Danger tags on it.
        – can-ned_food
        2 days ago






      • 1




        @NigelTouch So, shouldn't it be a little Earth with a face, or maybe an image of the overworked generator or turbine oh so far away? Even so, maybe “protect me” or “don't waste me” would be better.
        – can-ned_food
        2 days ago













      • 1




        Yeah, [conserve] would be a bit dull and more confusing than helpful. But "Save me" still doesn't makes sense, even if we imagine switch is talking to us: "save me (from what?)".
        – zx8754
        2 days ago






      • 5




        Save doesn't have to mean saving/rescuing from something. It also means, in this instance, preserve/don't use. So 'Don't use me' would mean the same thing.
        – user2397282
        2 days ago






      • 3




        Just conserve on its own would be a bit strange. Conserve energy would be better—and is often seen.
        – Jason Bassford
        2 days ago






      • 1




        @user2397282 Except that “Don't use me” sounds like a mandate. I would put that label on a switch which should not be operated — though I would be more likely to disconnect whatever piece of equipment I didn't want operated, or to hang one of my red Danger tags on it.
        – can-ned_food
        2 days ago






      • 1




        @NigelTouch So, shouldn't it be a little Earth with a face, or maybe an image of the overworked generator or turbine oh so far away? Even so, maybe “protect me” or “don't waste me” would be better.
        – can-ned_food
        2 days ago








      1




      1




      Yeah, [conserve] would be a bit dull and more confusing than helpful. But "Save me" still doesn't makes sense, even if we imagine switch is talking to us: "save me (from what?)".
      – zx8754
      2 days ago




      Yeah, [conserve] would be a bit dull and more confusing than helpful. But "Save me" still doesn't makes sense, even if we imagine switch is talking to us: "save me (from what?)".
      – zx8754
      2 days ago




      5




      5




      Save doesn't have to mean saving/rescuing from something. It also means, in this instance, preserve/don't use. So 'Don't use me' would mean the same thing.
      – user2397282
      2 days ago




      Save doesn't have to mean saving/rescuing from something. It also means, in this instance, preserve/don't use. So 'Don't use me' would mean the same thing.
      – user2397282
      2 days ago




      3




      3




      Just conserve on its own would be a bit strange. Conserve energy would be better—and is often seen.
      – Jason Bassford
      2 days ago




      Just conserve on its own would be a bit strange. Conserve energy would be better—and is often seen.
      – Jason Bassford
      2 days ago




      1




      1




      @user2397282 Except that “Don't use me” sounds like a mandate. I would put that label on a switch which should not be operated — though I would be more likely to disconnect whatever piece of equipment I didn't want operated, or to hang one of my red Danger tags on it.
      – can-ned_food
      2 days ago




      @user2397282 Except that “Don't use me” sounds like a mandate. I would put that label on a switch which should not be operated — though I would be more likely to disconnect whatever piece of equipment I didn't want operated, or to hang one of my red Danger tags on it.
      – can-ned_food
      2 days ago




      1




      1




      @NigelTouch So, shouldn't it be a little Earth with a face, or maybe an image of the overworked generator or turbine oh so far away? Even so, maybe “protect me” or “don't waste me” would be better.
      – can-ned_food
      2 days ago





      @NigelTouch So, shouldn't it be a little Earth with a face, or maybe an image of the overworked generator or turbine oh so far away? Even so, maybe “protect me” or “don't waste me” would be better.
      – can-ned_food
      2 days ago













      up vote
      20
      down vote













      Save me is fine because it does not necessarily only mean to save something or someone from something.



      If you look at the Oxford Dictionaries Online definitions for save, you'll see five definitions including the following:




      Keep safe or rescue (someone or something) from harm or danger.



      • ‘they brought him in to help save the club from bankruptcy’



      The definition above fits the save from context



      The definition relevant to the save electricity context is actually:




      Preserve (something) by not expending or using it.



      • ‘save your strength till later’






      share|improve this answer


















      • 4




        Probably the most common example of the last use would be save money. For example, "I'm saving [my money] for a new computer".
        – TripeHound
        2 days ago







      • 1




        Correct. And they slapped it on that switch because it's an electric switch.
        – RonJohn
        10 hours ago














      up vote
      20
      down vote













      Save me is fine because it does not necessarily only mean to save something or someone from something.



      If you look at the Oxford Dictionaries Online definitions for save, you'll see five definitions including the following:




      Keep safe or rescue (someone or something) from harm or danger.



      • ‘they brought him in to help save the club from bankruptcy’



      The definition above fits the save from context



      The definition relevant to the save electricity context is actually:




      Preserve (something) by not expending or using it.



      • ‘save your strength till later’






      share|improve this answer


















      • 4




        Probably the most common example of the last use would be save money. For example, "I'm saving [my money] for a new computer".
        – TripeHound
        2 days ago







      • 1




        Correct. And they slapped it on that switch because it's an electric switch.
        – RonJohn
        10 hours ago












      up vote
      20
      down vote










      up vote
      20
      down vote









      Save me is fine because it does not necessarily only mean to save something or someone from something.



      If you look at the Oxford Dictionaries Online definitions for save, you'll see five definitions including the following:




      Keep safe or rescue (someone or something) from harm or danger.



      • ‘they brought him in to help save the club from bankruptcy’



      The definition above fits the save from context



      The definition relevant to the save electricity context is actually:




      Preserve (something) by not expending or using it.



      • ‘save your strength till later’






      share|improve this answer














      Save me is fine because it does not necessarily only mean to save something or someone from something.



      If you look at the Oxford Dictionaries Online definitions for save, you'll see five definitions including the following:




      Keep safe or rescue (someone or something) from harm or danger.



      • ‘they brought him in to help save the club from bankruptcy’



      The definition above fits the save from context



      The definition relevant to the save electricity context is actually:




      Preserve (something) by not expending or using it.



      • ‘save your strength till later’







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 2 days ago

























      answered 2 days ago









      bookmanu

      2,995423




      2,995423







      • 4




        Probably the most common example of the last use would be save money. For example, "I'm saving [my money] for a new computer".
        – TripeHound
        2 days ago







      • 1




        Correct. And they slapped it on that switch because it's an electric switch.
        – RonJohn
        10 hours ago












      • 4




        Probably the most common example of the last use would be save money. For example, "I'm saving [my money] for a new computer".
        – TripeHound
        2 days ago







      • 1




        Correct. And they slapped it on that switch because it's an electric switch.
        – RonJohn
        10 hours ago







      4




      4




      Probably the most common example of the last use would be save money. For example, "I'm saving [my money] for a new computer".
      – TripeHound
      2 days ago





      Probably the most common example of the last use would be save money. For example, "I'm saving [my money] for a new computer".
      – TripeHound
      2 days ago





      1




      1




      Correct. And they slapped it on that switch because it's an electric switch.
      – RonJohn
      10 hours ago




      Correct. And they slapped it on that switch because it's an electric switch.
      – RonJohn
      10 hours ago










      up vote
      15
      down vote













      I would say "save me" is fine in English. It ends up as somewhat of a pun, which doesn't translate well and might have been unintentional, but I don't think that detracts from the message.



      It's common in English to talk about "saving electricity" or saving some other resource like money. This is listed as definition 4 of Save on dictionary.com:




      to avoid the spending, consumption, or waste of




      This works fairly well, and is extremely common in English. The only point for potential confusion is that the label is on a switch, so it could come across more as "save the light switch" rather than "save electricity". This is also where the double-meaning comes in; this interpretation invokes definition 1 or 2 instead:




      1. to rescue from danger or possible harm, injury, or loss

      2. to keep safe, intact, or unhurt; safeguard; preserve



      In this context, the object is being personified and asking for help in some way. "Save me!" without any indication as to what they might need saving from is perfectly acceptable in English, though it does imply that there is some kind of danger that exists.



      For a fluent English speaker, I think "Save me!" is fine and the dual interpretations are likely to be clear enough to understand, while the slight pun and personification will make the message more memorable and eye-catching. However, since the message is intended for a "bilingual school" it's possible that the double-meaning will be more confusing than it is worth. An alternative would be the more unambiguous "Save electricity!" which dodges the second meaning arising from "me". A shorter version could be "Save power"; it seems awkward to me, but it's comprehensible enough.






      share|improve this answer
























        up vote
        15
        down vote













        I would say "save me" is fine in English. It ends up as somewhat of a pun, which doesn't translate well and might have been unintentional, but I don't think that detracts from the message.



        It's common in English to talk about "saving electricity" or saving some other resource like money. This is listed as definition 4 of Save on dictionary.com:




        to avoid the spending, consumption, or waste of




        This works fairly well, and is extremely common in English. The only point for potential confusion is that the label is on a switch, so it could come across more as "save the light switch" rather than "save electricity". This is also where the double-meaning comes in; this interpretation invokes definition 1 or 2 instead:




        1. to rescue from danger or possible harm, injury, or loss

        2. to keep safe, intact, or unhurt; safeguard; preserve



        In this context, the object is being personified and asking for help in some way. "Save me!" without any indication as to what they might need saving from is perfectly acceptable in English, though it does imply that there is some kind of danger that exists.



        For a fluent English speaker, I think "Save me!" is fine and the dual interpretations are likely to be clear enough to understand, while the slight pun and personification will make the message more memorable and eye-catching. However, since the message is intended for a "bilingual school" it's possible that the double-meaning will be more confusing than it is worth. An alternative would be the more unambiguous "Save electricity!" which dodges the second meaning arising from "me". A shorter version could be "Save power"; it seems awkward to me, but it's comprehensible enough.






        share|improve this answer






















          up vote
          15
          down vote










          up vote
          15
          down vote









          I would say "save me" is fine in English. It ends up as somewhat of a pun, which doesn't translate well and might have been unintentional, but I don't think that detracts from the message.



          It's common in English to talk about "saving electricity" or saving some other resource like money. This is listed as definition 4 of Save on dictionary.com:




          to avoid the spending, consumption, or waste of




          This works fairly well, and is extremely common in English. The only point for potential confusion is that the label is on a switch, so it could come across more as "save the light switch" rather than "save electricity". This is also where the double-meaning comes in; this interpretation invokes definition 1 or 2 instead:




          1. to rescue from danger or possible harm, injury, or loss

          2. to keep safe, intact, or unhurt; safeguard; preserve



          In this context, the object is being personified and asking for help in some way. "Save me!" without any indication as to what they might need saving from is perfectly acceptable in English, though it does imply that there is some kind of danger that exists.



          For a fluent English speaker, I think "Save me!" is fine and the dual interpretations are likely to be clear enough to understand, while the slight pun and personification will make the message more memorable and eye-catching. However, since the message is intended for a "bilingual school" it's possible that the double-meaning will be more confusing than it is worth. An alternative would be the more unambiguous "Save electricity!" which dodges the second meaning arising from "me". A shorter version could be "Save power"; it seems awkward to me, but it's comprehensible enough.






          share|improve this answer












          I would say "save me" is fine in English. It ends up as somewhat of a pun, which doesn't translate well and might have been unintentional, but I don't think that detracts from the message.



          It's common in English to talk about "saving electricity" or saving some other resource like money. This is listed as definition 4 of Save on dictionary.com:




          to avoid the spending, consumption, or waste of




          This works fairly well, and is extremely common in English. The only point for potential confusion is that the label is on a switch, so it could come across more as "save the light switch" rather than "save electricity". This is also where the double-meaning comes in; this interpretation invokes definition 1 or 2 instead:




          1. to rescue from danger or possible harm, injury, or loss

          2. to keep safe, intact, or unhurt; safeguard; preserve



          In this context, the object is being personified and asking for help in some way. "Save me!" without any indication as to what they might need saving from is perfectly acceptable in English, though it does imply that there is some kind of danger that exists.



          For a fluent English speaker, I think "Save me!" is fine and the dual interpretations are likely to be clear enough to understand, while the slight pun and personification will make the message more memorable and eye-catching. However, since the message is intended for a "bilingual school" it's possible that the double-meaning will be more confusing than it is worth. An alternative would be the more unambiguous "Save electricity!" which dodges the second meaning arising from "me". A shorter version could be "Save power"; it seems awkward to me, but it's comprehensible enough.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 2 days ago









          Kamil Drakari

          61418




          61418




















              up vote
              10
              down vote













              You could better come up with the most precis option: Save Energy! or you can say "Save Power!."




              Example poster image from previews.123rf.com:



              save energy poster







              share|improve this answer


















              • 4




                I agree that this is the best option, but I think it could do with some more explanation as to why. The reason being that in "save me" stuck to a light switch, the "me" is the light switch. We don't want to save the light switch, we want to save energy/electricity. The intention of the current note is relatively clear from the context, but it's not colloquial, and schools generally aim to teach idiomatic phrases when teaching languages.
                – AndyT
                13 hours ago














              up vote
              10
              down vote













              You could better come up with the most precis option: Save Energy! or you can say "Save Power!."




              Example poster image from previews.123rf.com:



              save energy poster







              share|improve this answer


















              • 4




                I agree that this is the best option, but I think it could do with some more explanation as to why. The reason being that in "save me" stuck to a light switch, the "me" is the light switch. We don't want to save the light switch, we want to save energy/electricity. The intention of the current note is relatively clear from the context, but it's not colloquial, and schools generally aim to teach idiomatic phrases when teaching languages.
                – AndyT
                13 hours ago












              up vote
              10
              down vote










              up vote
              10
              down vote









              You could better come up with the most precis option: Save Energy! or you can say "Save Power!."




              Example poster image from previews.123rf.com:



              save energy poster







              share|improve this answer














              You could better come up with the most precis option: Save Energy! or you can say "Save Power!."




              Example poster image from previews.123rf.com:



              save energy poster








              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited yesterday

























              answered yesterday









              Ahmed

              2,060729




              2,060729







              • 4




                I agree that this is the best option, but I think it could do with some more explanation as to why. The reason being that in "save me" stuck to a light switch, the "me" is the light switch. We don't want to save the light switch, we want to save energy/electricity. The intention of the current note is relatively clear from the context, but it's not colloquial, and schools generally aim to teach idiomatic phrases when teaching languages.
                – AndyT
                13 hours ago












              • 4




                I agree that this is the best option, but I think it could do with some more explanation as to why. The reason being that in "save me" stuck to a light switch, the "me" is the light switch. We don't want to save the light switch, we want to save energy/electricity. The intention of the current note is relatively clear from the context, but it's not colloquial, and schools generally aim to teach idiomatic phrases when teaching languages.
                – AndyT
                13 hours ago







              4




              4




              I agree that this is the best option, but I think it could do with some more explanation as to why. The reason being that in "save me" stuck to a light switch, the "me" is the light switch. We don't want to save the light switch, we want to save energy/electricity. The intention of the current note is relatively clear from the context, but it's not colloquial, and schools generally aim to teach idiomatic phrases when teaching languages.
              – AndyT
              13 hours ago




              I agree that this is the best option, but I think it could do with some more explanation as to why. The reason being that in "save me" stuck to a light switch, the "me" is the light switch. We don't want to save the light switch, we want to save energy/electricity. The intention of the current note is relatively clear from the context, but it's not colloquial, and schools generally aim to teach idiomatic phrases when teaching languages.
              – AndyT
              13 hours ago










              up vote
              7
              down vote













              What about "Switch off!" or "Turn off!" ?






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.













              • 3




                I like this option, but it sounds more like a command, than a kind request.
                – zx8754
                2 days ago






              • 3




                @zx8754 "Please turn off"?! ;)
                – MrWhite
                14 hours ago















              up vote
              7
              down vote













              What about "Switch off!" or "Turn off!" ?






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.













              • 3




                I like this option, but it sounds more like a command, than a kind request.
                – zx8754
                2 days ago






              • 3




                @zx8754 "Please turn off"?! ;)
                – MrWhite
                14 hours ago













              up vote
              7
              down vote










              up vote
              7
              down vote









              What about "Switch off!" or "Turn off!" ?






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.









              What about "Switch off!" or "Turn off!" ?







              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.









              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer






              New contributor




              John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.









              answered 2 days ago









              John ES L

              771




              771




              New contributor




              John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.





              New contributor





              John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.






              John ES L is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.







              • 3




                I like this option, but it sounds more like a command, than a kind request.
                – zx8754
                2 days ago






              • 3




                @zx8754 "Please turn off"?! ;)
                – MrWhite
                14 hours ago













              • 3




                I like this option, but it sounds more like a command, than a kind request.
                – zx8754
                2 days ago






              • 3




                @zx8754 "Please turn off"?! ;)
                – MrWhite
                14 hours ago








              3




              3




              I like this option, but it sounds more like a command, than a kind request.
              – zx8754
              2 days ago




              I like this option, but it sounds more like a command, than a kind request.
              – zx8754
              2 days ago




              3




              3




              @zx8754 "Please turn off"?! ;)
              – MrWhite
              14 hours ago





              @zx8754 "Please turn off"?! ;)
              – MrWhite
              14 hours ago











              up vote
              5
              down vote













              How about phrasing it as a request or mandate in the negative?




              Do not waste me!

              Don't waste me!




              ‘Waste’ here being the transitive form of the verb rather than the uncountable noun — the noun which is synonymic with ‘rubbish’, ‘trash’, ‘refuse’, ‘garbage’, or what–have–you.

              You could also say




              Don't squander me!




              And, perhaps you should, because that word — from my experience — isn't often heard or read except in certain contexts: some people may not be readily familiar with the word, or may think it quaint, but either one will attract attention and shouldn't obfuscate the sentence unless the person is almost illiterate in English or has a very small English vocabulary. I think most English–speaking people are aware of the word ‘squander’ and what it conveys.



              The added benefit with my recommendation is that it accommodates use — you can use it, but don't waste it. Of course, so too does the conserve one.






              share|improve this answer




















              • Yes, but the abbreviated form.
                – Lambie
                yesterday














              up vote
              5
              down vote













              How about phrasing it as a request or mandate in the negative?




              Do not waste me!

              Don't waste me!




              ‘Waste’ here being the transitive form of the verb rather than the uncountable noun — the noun which is synonymic with ‘rubbish’, ‘trash’, ‘refuse’, ‘garbage’, or what–have–you.

              You could also say




              Don't squander me!




              And, perhaps you should, because that word — from my experience — isn't often heard or read except in certain contexts: some people may not be readily familiar with the word, or may think it quaint, but either one will attract attention and shouldn't obfuscate the sentence unless the person is almost illiterate in English or has a very small English vocabulary. I think most English–speaking people are aware of the word ‘squander’ and what it conveys.



              The added benefit with my recommendation is that it accommodates use — you can use it, but don't waste it. Of course, so too does the conserve one.






              share|improve this answer




















              • Yes, but the abbreviated form.
                – Lambie
                yesterday












              up vote
              5
              down vote










              up vote
              5
              down vote









              How about phrasing it as a request or mandate in the negative?




              Do not waste me!

              Don't waste me!




              ‘Waste’ here being the transitive form of the verb rather than the uncountable noun — the noun which is synonymic with ‘rubbish’, ‘trash’, ‘refuse’, ‘garbage’, or what–have–you.

              You could also say




              Don't squander me!




              And, perhaps you should, because that word — from my experience — isn't often heard or read except in certain contexts: some people may not be readily familiar with the word, or may think it quaint, but either one will attract attention and shouldn't obfuscate the sentence unless the person is almost illiterate in English or has a very small English vocabulary. I think most English–speaking people are aware of the word ‘squander’ and what it conveys.



              The added benefit with my recommendation is that it accommodates use — you can use it, but don't waste it. Of course, so too does the conserve one.






              share|improve this answer












              How about phrasing it as a request or mandate in the negative?




              Do not waste me!

              Don't waste me!




              ‘Waste’ here being the transitive form of the verb rather than the uncountable noun — the noun which is synonymic with ‘rubbish’, ‘trash’, ‘refuse’, ‘garbage’, or what–have–you.

              You could also say




              Don't squander me!




              And, perhaps you should, because that word — from my experience — isn't often heard or read except in certain contexts: some people may not be readily familiar with the word, or may think it quaint, but either one will attract attention and shouldn't obfuscate the sentence unless the person is almost illiterate in English or has a very small English vocabulary. I think most English–speaking people are aware of the word ‘squander’ and what it conveys.



              The added benefit with my recommendation is that it accommodates use — you can use it, but don't waste it. Of course, so too does the conserve one.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered 2 days ago









              can-ned_food

              180118




              180118











              • Yes, but the abbreviated form.
                – Lambie
                yesterday
















              • Yes, but the abbreviated form.
                – Lambie
                yesterday















              Yes, but the abbreviated form.
              – Lambie
              yesterday




              Yes, but the abbreviated form.
              – Lambie
              yesterday










              up vote
              5
              down vote













              There was an energy conservation campaign a while back that used the slogan




              Save a watt!




              another slogan used the phrase




              Kill a watt!




              The literal meaning is clear and this is also a pun of the word "kilowatt" which is part of the most common unit in which energy usage is billed by utilities, the kilowatt hour.






              share|improve this answer


























                up vote
                5
                down vote













                There was an energy conservation campaign a while back that used the slogan




                Save a watt!




                another slogan used the phrase




                Kill a watt!




                The literal meaning is clear and this is also a pun of the word "kilowatt" which is part of the most common unit in which energy usage is billed by utilities, the kilowatt hour.






                share|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  5
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  5
                  down vote









                  There was an energy conservation campaign a while back that used the slogan




                  Save a watt!




                  another slogan used the phrase




                  Kill a watt!




                  The literal meaning is clear and this is also a pun of the word "kilowatt" which is part of the most common unit in which energy usage is billed by utilities, the kilowatt hour.






                  share|improve this answer














                  There was an energy conservation campaign a while back that used the slogan




                  Save a watt!




                  another slogan used the phrase




                  Kill a watt!




                  The literal meaning is clear and this is also a pun of the word "kilowatt" which is part of the most common unit in which energy usage is billed by utilities, the kilowatt hour.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 11 hours ago

























                  answered yesterday









                  ohwilleke

                  1,630212




                  1,630212




















                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      The word "save" frames the problem as if there is a fixed amount of energy that must be allocated efficiently over time -- "save it now, and you can use it later". Efficiently "saving" energy that is already on the power grid is not really an option with current technology, from what I understand. Instead, I guess the environmental goal is to reduce the amount of energy that is produced in the first place.



                      You could use "waste not", short for "waste not, want not", defined in Wiktionary as...




                      (idiomatic) If one is not wasteful then one will not be in need.




                      This idiom is usually for individuals and households, but it can also apply to us all collectively in the context of energy usage, like...




                      If we don't produce more energy than we need, there will be plenty.




                      Here, "plenty" can refer to not only energy, but also other resources (through externalities).






                      share|improve this answer
















                      • 2




                        You seem to be assuming that save connotes gradual accumulation (or at least, reduced expenditure) of a limited resource now for the specific purpose of having a larger quantity of that resource available for use at a later time. But that's not necessarily so; the verb save can also mean simply to minimize waste. For example, this is the difference between saving money for an intended future purchase, and saving money by taking advantage of discounts when shopping.
                        – jdmc
                        yesterday










                      • @jdmc I think that the "saving by" example still implies the "saving for" interpretation. Whether I'm saving money, time, space, CPU cycles or my own mental or physical energy, the implication is that I have this resource and am saving it instead of wasting it, and that I am saving it because it can be put to other uses.
                        – Frank
                        yesterday






                      • 2




                        Not sure if this is what you meant, but in your example, if I cannot afford a purchase without taking advantage of the discount (eg, I have $20, the price is $30 without the discount and $10 with), then I think "saving money" is not correct there either -- I cannot save what I do not have.
                        – Frank
                        yesterday










                      • @Frank saving money is absolutely correct there, independant of whether you can afford it without the discount. You are SPENDING LESS, which is one of the definitions of save on the oxford dictionary.
                        – Aethenosity
                        8 hours ago










                      • @Aethenosity After "spending less" implicitly comes "than you would have spent otherwise", which is not meaningful if the counterfactual where you spend more is infeasible (since you could not have afforded it). That's my reading of the word, anyways -- that you can only save things that exist. (I may lay off replying soon. The OP suggested I post this answer; and I fear that I'm not saying anything new in the comments here now.)
                        – Frank
                        7 hours ago














                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      The word "save" frames the problem as if there is a fixed amount of energy that must be allocated efficiently over time -- "save it now, and you can use it later". Efficiently "saving" energy that is already on the power grid is not really an option with current technology, from what I understand. Instead, I guess the environmental goal is to reduce the amount of energy that is produced in the first place.



                      You could use "waste not", short for "waste not, want not", defined in Wiktionary as...




                      (idiomatic) If one is not wasteful then one will not be in need.




                      This idiom is usually for individuals and households, but it can also apply to us all collectively in the context of energy usage, like...




                      If we don't produce more energy than we need, there will be plenty.




                      Here, "plenty" can refer to not only energy, but also other resources (through externalities).






                      share|improve this answer
















                      • 2




                        You seem to be assuming that save connotes gradual accumulation (or at least, reduced expenditure) of a limited resource now for the specific purpose of having a larger quantity of that resource available for use at a later time. But that's not necessarily so; the verb save can also mean simply to minimize waste. For example, this is the difference between saving money for an intended future purchase, and saving money by taking advantage of discounts when shopping.
                        – jdmc
                        yesterday










                      • @jdmc I think that the "saving by" example still implies the "saving for" interpretation. Whether I'm saving money, time, space, CPU cycles or my own mental or physical energy, the implication is that I have this resource and am saving it instead of wasting it, and that I am saving it because it can be put to other uses.
                        – Frank
                        yesterday






                      • 2




                        Not sure if this is what you meant, but in your example, if I cannot afford a purchase without taking advantage of the discount (eg, I have $20, the price is $30 without the discount and $10 with), then I think "saving money" is not correct there either -- I cannot save what I do not have.
                        – Frank
                        yesterday










                      • @Frank saving money is absolutely correct there, independant of whether you can afford it without the discount. You are SPENDING LESS, which is one of the definitions of save on the oxford dictionary.
                        – Aethenosity
                        8 hours ago










                      • @Aethenosity After "spending less" implicitly comes "than you would have spent otherwise", which is not meaningful if the counterfactual where you spend more is infeasible (since you could not have afforded it). That's my reading of the word, anyways -- that you can only save things that exist. (I may lay off replying soon. The OP suggested I post this answer; and I fear that I'm not saying anything new in the comments here now.)
                        – Frank
                        7 hours ago












                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote









                      The word "save" frames the problem as if there is a fixed amount of energy that must be allocated efficiently over time -- "save it now, and you can use it later". Efficiently "saving" energy that is already on the power grid is not really an option with current technology, from what I understand. Instead, I guess the environmental goal is to reduce the amount of energy that is produced in the first place.



                      You could use "waste not", short for "waste not, want not", defined in Wiktionary as...




                      (idiomatic) If one is not wasteful then one will not be in need.




                      This idiom is usually for individuals and households, but it can also apply to us all collectively in the context of energy usage, like...




                      If we don't produce more energy than we need, there will be plenty.




                      Here, "plenty" can refer to not only energy, but also other resources (through externalities).






                      share|improve this answer












                      The word "save" frames the problem as if there is a fixed amount of energy that must be allocated efficiently over time -- "save it now, and you can use it later". Efficiently "saving" energy that is already on the power grid is not really an option with current technology, from what I understand. Instead, I guess the environmental goal is to reduce the amount of energy that is produced in the first place.



                      You could use "waste not", short for "waste not, want not", defined in Wiktionary as...




                      (idiomatic) If one is not wasteful then one will not be in need.




                      This idiom is usually for individuals and households, but it can also apply to us all collectively in the context of energy usage, like...




                      If we don't produce more energy than we need, there will be plenty.




                      Here, "plenty" can refer to not only energy, but also other resources (through externalities).







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered 2 days ago









                      Frank

                      1408




                      1408







                      • 2




                        You seem to be assuming that save connotes gradual accumulation (or at least, reduced expenditure) of a limited resource now for the specific purpose of having a larger quantity of that resource available for use at a later time. But that's not necessarily so; the verb save can also mean simply to minimize waste. For example, this is the difference between saving money for an intended future purchase, and saving money by taking advantage of discounts when shopping.
                        – jdmc
                        yesterday










                      • @jdmc I think that the "saving by" example still implies the "saving for" interpretation. Whether I'm saving money, time, space, CPU cycles or my own mental or physical energy, the implication is that I have this resource and am saving it instead of wasting it, and that I am saving it because it can be put to other uses.
                        – Frank
                        yesterday






                      • 2




                        Not sure if this is what you meant, but in your example, if I cannot afford a purchase without taking advantage of the discount (eg, I have $20, the price is $30 without the discount and $10 with), then I think "saving money" is not correct there either -- I cannot save what I do not have.
                        – Frank
                        yesterday










                      • @Frank saving money is absolutely correct there, independant of whether you can afford it without the discount. You are SPENDING LESS, which is one of the definitions of save on the oxford dictionary.
                        – Aethenosity
                        8 hours ago










                      • @Aethenosity After "spending less" implicitly comes "than you would have spent otherwise", which is not meaningful if the counterfactual where you spend more is infeasible (since you could not have afforded it). That's my reading of the word, anyways -- that you can only save things that exist. (I may lay off replying soon. The OP suggested I post this answer; and I fear that I'm not saying anything new in the comments here now.)
                        – Frank
                        7 hours ago












                      • 2




                        You seem to be assuming that save connotes gradual accumulation (or at least, reduced expenditure) of a limited resource now for the specific purpose of having a larger quantity of that resource available for use at a later time. But that's not necessarily so; the verb save can also mean simply to minimize waste. For example, this is the difference between saving money for an intended future purchase, and saving money by taking advantage of discounts when shopping.
                        – jdmc
                        yesterday










                      • @jdmc I think that the "saving by" example still implies the "saving for" interpretation. Whether I'm saving money, time, space, CPU cycles or my own mental or physical energy, the implication is that I have this resource and am saving it instead of wasting it, and that I am saving it because it can be put to other uses.
                        – Frank
                        yesterday






                      • 2




                        Not sure if this is what you meant, but in your example, if I cannot afford a purchase without taking advantage of the discount (eg, I have $20, the price is $30 without the discount and $10 with), then I think "saving money" is not correct there either -- I cannot save what I do not have.
                        – Frank
                        yesterday










                      • @Frank saving money is absolutely correct there, independant of whether you can afford it without the discount. You are SPENDING LESS, which is one of the definitions of save on the oxford dictionary.
                        – Aethenosity
                        8 hours ago










                      • @Aethenosity After "spending less" implicitly comes "than you would have spent otherwise", which is not meaningful if the counterfactual where you spend more is infeasible (since you could not have afforded it). That's my reading of the word, anyways -- that you can only save things that exist. (I may lay off replying soon. The OP suggested I post this answer; and I fear that I'm not saying anything new in the comments here now.)
                        – Frank
                        7 hours ago







                      2




                      2




                      You seem to be assuming that save connotes gradual accumulation (or at least, reduced expenditure) of a limited resource now for the specific purpose of having a larger quantity of that resource available for use at a later time. But that's not necessarily so; the verb save can also mean simply to minimize waste. For example, this is the difference between saving money for an intended future purchase, and saving money by taking advantage of discounts when shopping.
                      – jdmc
                      yesterday




                      You seem to be assuming that save connotes gradual accumulation (or at least, reduced expenditure) of a limited resource now for the specific purpose of having a larger quantity of that resource available for use at a later time. But that's not necessarily so; the verb save can also mean simply to minimize waste. For example, this is the difference between saving money for an intended future purchase, and saving money by taking advantage of discounts when shopping.
                      – jdmc
                      yesterday












                      @jdmc I think that the "saving by" example still implies the "saving for" interpretation. Whether I'm saving money, time, space, CPU cycles or my own mental or physical energy, the implication is that I have this resource and am saving it instead of wasting it, and that I am saving it because it can be put to other uses.
                      – Frank
                      yesterday




                      @jdmc I think that the "saving by" example still implies the "saving for" interpretation. Whether I'm saving money, time, space, CPU cycles or my own mental or physical energy, the implication is that I have this resource and am saving it instead of wasting it, and that I am saving it because it can be put to other uses.
                      – Frank
                      yesterday




                      2




                      2




                      Not sure if this is what you meant, but in your example, if I cannot afford a purchase without taking advantage of the discount (eg, I have $20, the price is $30 without the discount and $10 with), then I think "saving money" is not correct there either -- I cannot save what I do not have.
                      – Frank
                      yesterday




                      Not sure if this is what you meant, but in your example, if I cannot afford a purchase without taking advantage of the discount (eg, I have $20, the price is $30 without the discount and $10 with), then I think "saving money" is not correct there either -- I cannot save what I do not have.
                      – Frank
                      yesterday












                      @Frank saving money is absolutely correct there, independant of whether you can afford it without the discount. You are SPENDING LESS, which is one of the definitions of save on the oxford dictionary.
                      – Aethenosity
                      8 hours ago




                      @Frank saving money is absolutely correct there, independant of whether you can afford it without the discount. You are SPENDING LESS, which is one of the definitions of save on the oxford dictionary.
                      – Aethenosity
                      8 hours ago












                      @Aethenosity After "spending less" implicitly comes "than you would have spent otherwise", which is not meaningful if the counterfactual where you spend more is infeasible (since you could not have afforded it). That's my reading of the word, anyways -- that you can only save things that exist. (I may lay off replying soon. The OP suggested I post this answer; and I fear that I'm not saying anything new in the comments here now.)
                      – Frank
                      7 hours ago




                      @Aethenosity After "spending less" implicitly comes "than you would have spent otherwise", which is not meaningful if the counterfactual where you spend more is infeasible (since you could not have afforded it). That's my reading of the word, anyways -- that you can only save things that exist. (I may lay off replying soon. The OP suggested I post this answer; and I fear that I'm not saying anything new in the comments here now.)
                      – Frank
                      7 hours ago










                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      I think the intent is to say 'Don't forget to switch off after use'. A version of 'Don't waste energy/me' or a lengthier command "Switch off after use' are viable alternatives. I think you have to work with the space constraint of the switch size but depending on how important clear instruction needs to be, you can use 'save power', 'save earth', 'save life', 'use judiciously'.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.

















                      • Thanks, already got many good alternatives, yes the space is the issue here.
                        – zx8754
                        4 hours ago














                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      I think the intent is to say 'Don't forget to switch off after use'. A version of 'Don't waste energy/me' or a lengthier command "Switch off after use' are viable alternatives. I think you have to work with the space constraint of the switch size but depending on how important clear instruction needs to be, you can use 'save power', 'save earth', 'save life', 'use judiciously'.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.

















                      • Thanks, already got many good alternatives, yes the space is the issue here.
                        – zx8754
                        4 hours ago












                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote









                      I think the intent is to say 'Don't forget to switch off after use'. A version of 'Don't waste energy/me' or a lengthier command "Switch off after use' are viable alternatives. I think you have to work with the space constraint of the switch size but depending on how important clear instruction needs to be, you can use 'save power', 'save earth', 'save life', 'use judiciously'.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      I think the intent is to say 'Don't forget to switch off after use'. A version of 'Don't waste energy/me' or a lengthier command "Switch off after use' are viable alternatives. I think you have to work with the space constraint of the switch size but depending on how important clear instruction needs to be, you can use 'save power', 'save earth', 'save life', 'use judiciously'.







                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer






                      New contributor




                      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      answered 7 hours ago









                      Xavitoj Cheema

                      1212




                      1212




                      New contributor




                      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





                      New contributor





                      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      Xavitoj Cheema is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.











                      • Thanks, already got many good alternatives, yes the space is the issue here.
                        – zx8754
                        4 hours ago
















                      • Thanks, already got many good alternatives, yes the space is the issue here.
                        – zx8754
                        4 hours ago















                      Thanks, already got many good alternatives, yes the space is the issue here.
                      – zx8754
                      4 hours ago




                      Thanks, already got many good alternatives, yes the space is the issue here.
                      – zx8754
                      4 hours ago

















                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded















































                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463769%2fbetter-alternatives-to-save-me-meaning-to-save-electricity%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest
































































                      Comments

                      Post a Comment

                      Popular posts from this blog

                      What does second last employer means? [closed]

                      Image
                      Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0; up vote -3 down vote favorite Say, for example I have worked in the following companies, Company A => 2010 - 2011 Company B => 2011 - 2012 Company C => 2012 - Till Date Company D => Have offer Now assume Company D is asking to submit documents from my second last employer. So from the list of companies given, which company would be qualified as second last employer? software-industry employer share | improve this question asked Aug 10 '14 at 5:16 Rajaprabhu Aravindasamy 559 1 6 13 closed as off-topic by Jim G., jmort253 ♦ Aug 11 '14 at 1:58 This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason: "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address...
                      Read more

                      List of Gilmore Girls characters

                      Image
                      The season three cast—(Back row): Lane, Michel, Paris, Emily, Richard, Sookie, Miss Patty, Kirk; Front row: Jess, Luke, Lorelai, Rory, Dean This is a list of characters for the comedy-drama television series Gilmore Girls . Contents 1 Main characters 1.1 Lorelai Gilmore 1.2 Rory Gilmore 1.3 Sookie St. James 1.4 Lane Kim 1.5 Michel Gerard 1.6 Luke Danes 1.7 Emily Gilmore 1.8 Richard Gilmore 1.9 Paris Geller 1.10 Dean Forester 1.11 Jess Mariano 1.12 Kirk Gleason 1.13 Jason Stiles 1.14 Logan Huntzberger 2 Major recurring characters 2.1 Christopher Hayden 2.2 Jackson Belleville 2.3 Mrs. Kim 2.4 Tristin DuGray 2.5 Max Medina 2.6 Taylor Doose 2.7 Dave Rygalski 2.8 Marty 3 Recurring characters 3.1 Stars Hollow 3.2 Chilton 3.3 Yale 3.4 Other 4 Notable guest stars 5 Unseen characters 6 Notes 7 References Main characters Actor Character Appearances Season 1 Season 2 Season 3 Season 4 Season 5 Season 6 Season 7 A Year in the Life Lauren Graham Lorelai Gilmore...
                      Read more

                      Confectionery

                      Image
                      Prepared foods made with a lot of sugar or other cabohydrates "Sweetmeat" redirects here. For the racehorse, see Sweetmeat (horse). Not to be confused with Sweetbread. This Kransekake is a traditional Scandinavian baker's confection. Confectionery is the art of making confections , which are food items that are rich in sugar and carbohydrates. Exact definitions are difficult. [1] In general, though, confectionery is divided into two broad and somewhat overlapping categories, bakers' confections and sugar confections. [2] Bakers' confectionery, also called flour confections , includes principally sweet pastries, cakes, and similar baked goods. Sugar confectionery includes candies ( sweets in British English), candied nuts, chocolates, chewing gum, bubble gum, pastillage, and other confections that are made primarily of sugar. In some cases, chocolate confections (confections made of chocolate) are treated as a separate category, as are sugar-free versions of ...
                      Read more