Crossword clues

[Jnyusa]

We'll have to see if it fits with everything else!

Cryptics aren't usually like crosswords, are they? - where all the letters have to intersect. Don't they usually have letters hanging out the end for which you simply have to figure out the clue?

Jn

[Parmamaite]

It's the only word left in the crossword, so it fits all right. In cryptic crosswords (as in most English crosswords) only about every second letter intersect with other words.

Exactly! What little I've seen of English cryptic crosswords comes down to the clues not fitting perfectly, but just "in a way" - which to me means that the clue is just not very good.
It's like asking "what have I got in my pockets" as a riddle.

Quite the opposite, the clue in a cryptic crossword is like a riddle, in a normal crossword it's like a question. A good cryptic clue is absolutely logically correct, but phrased to make you think in another direction.

String fits as much as cryptic solutions usually do.

I don't think so, not as per the explanations we've found so far, it - as Truehobbit says - only fits "in a way". But maybe the crossword constructor was having a bad day.

[Aravar]

The 'horses right' clue is string.

The clue solves as 'take for a ride' = STING (in the sense of defraud), and R for right, STING goes around R to make STRING. One can have as string of horses.

Edit to add: the 'sporting' part of the TWELFTH clue probably refers to 'The Glorious Twelfth' of August, the day the grouse shooting season starts.

[Parmamaite]

Ah, thanks Aravar

I had no idea that sting could mean defraud.


Well that does it! Now the crossword is completed, and my mind is at rest. Thanks everyone who took the effort to help

[truehobbit]

STING goes around R to make STRING

Huh?

If the argument is one of letters, you could only convincingly say that all the letters in a word go around another letter, if that letter was exactly in the middle of the word. "String" is not "sting around r".
Otherwise you could just take a word and stick in a letter anywhere to make a new word and call that a logical clue.

If it's semantic, I just don't get it.

What's become of Jny's explanation of the same aspect?

Well, in English there are two expressions that mean almost the same thing:

Take for a ride
String along

Both mean to deceive a person by a series of falsehoods or exaggerations.

I thought that made much more sense than Sting + R out of nowhere.

[TIGG]

What's become of Jny's explanation of the same aspect?

Well, in English there are two expressions that mean almost the same thing:

Take for a ride
String along

Both mean to deceive a person by a series of falsehoods or exaggerations.

I thought that made much more sense than Sting + R out of nowhere.

I agree and a trainer taking out multiple horses to the racetrack for trackwork is a 'string' of horses.

add to that 'string along' = 'take for a ride' the clue certainly matches with String.

[Teremia]

In short: time for another set of clues! Thank you, Parma, for livening up the dull days of November. Who'll help us get through the next week???

[Parmamaite]

Horses right to take for a ride outside

divide in two parts, one definition and one cryptic clue:

horses - right to take for a ride outside

right = r
to take for a ride = sting
outside = wrap sting around "r"

gives: STRING which is an answer to the clue "horses"

That's the way cryptic crosswords works, Jnyusa's explanation didn't quite fit, you can't just say that it's along the line of something, it must be stringent according to the rules of cryptic crosswords.

Aravar is quite right - as usual.

[Aravar]

Huh?

If the argument is one of letters, you could only convincingly say that all the letters in a word go around another letter, if that letter was exactly in the middle of the word. "String" is not "sting around r".
Otherwise you could just take a word and stick in a letter anywhere to make a new word and call that a logical clue.

If it's semantic, I just don't get it.

'Outside' simply means that the letters of STING are outside the letter for right -R, which they are in STRING.

In crosswords something like outside, or around, or surround often means letters of one word are enclosed by the letters of another.It's one of the conventions, in the same way that 'confound' or 'confuse indicate an anagram.

As Parm has shown, every element of the clue points to the solution.

[truehobbit]

So, why not "srting" or "stirng" or "stinrg"? I'm sorry, but it's anything but logic. It may be a convention, but it's not logic.
As is "right" = r

[Parmamaite]

because srting etc. aint words.

And in my Chambers dictionary it says:
r or r. abbrev 1 radius 2 right.

[truehobbit]

because srting etc. aint words.

Which, as I'm sure you know, is entirely coincidental. They might just as well be words. There is nothing inherent in the clue which tells you without doubt where the "r" should go, and that is what would be required if it were to be logical.

And in my Chambers dictionary it says:
r or r. abbrev 1 radius 2 right.

So, which part of the clue tells you that you need the abbreviation for "right"? Rather than the abbreviation for any of the other words in the clue. Just because it's the only way to make a word? Because it's a convention?
Great logic, if you ask me.

[Parmamaite]

That's part of the puzzle.

Does "right" mean take the right part of "horses" or does it mean "r"?

Is "outside" an instruction to put one series of letters around another or should we look for a synonym for "outside"?

Is "to take for a ride" supposed to mean that we should scramble the letters of "right"?

etc. one just have to try the different options until you strike gold.

In this case we know that "string" is the right solution rather than "Srting" or "Stirng" because we need a synonym for "horses".

It's a kind of puzzle that has certain conventions, I don't think I can explain it any clearer.

[Aravar]

because srting etc. aint words.

Which, as I'm sure you know, is entirely coincidental. They might just as well be words. There is nothing inherent in the clue which tells you without doubt where the "r" should go, and that is what would be required if it were to be logical.

That would be true if there were English words srting or stinrg. It must be implicit in a English crossword that the solution will be an English word (or at least a word when it comes to proper names), just as in Wilko's Moot crossword the solution would include Elvish. Logic dictates that the 'r' is in a position which makes an English word, rather than simply a string of letters (excuse the pun). As such srting cannot be a valid solution.

It wouldn't necessarily be different even if there were a word srting, because the position of the letters in the grid might not allow for that solution; or the definition of srting might be a kind of pudding, which would mean that it was difficult to relate it to horses, the first part fo the clue. If and only if there were two words: srting and string, both of which pertained to matters horsey and which were both allowed by the grid position could the clue be said to be ambiguous.

It is true, though, that the clue 'horses take for a ride' could also be used to produce the word string. If that were the clue, jnyusa's reasoning would be absolutely right.

[truehobbit]

It's a kind of puzzle that has certain conventions, I don't think I can explain it any clearer.

Conventions are fine, Parma, I'm just saying that we mustn't mix up conventions and logic. You claimed that the cryptic crossword is completely logical, and maybe it is so within its own conventions, but these conventions are arbitrary, and, (as almost everything depends on mutual acceptance of arbitrary conventions) in the case of cryptic crosswords, conventions that are particularly contrived (or so it seems to me), which, for me, detracts from whatever logic there may be in the use of these conventions.


Aravar, thanks for the further explanation! I do agree that it works that way, I'm just saying that to me this means that even if one knows the conventions much still depends on interpretation and common sense.

It is true, though, that the clue 'horses take for a ride' could also be used to produce the word string. If that were the clue, jnyusa's reasoning would be absolutely right.

So, the actual clue was just to make it more confusing?
The thing is, I still don't see why someone shouldn't come up with "string" in response to "take for a ride" right away, rather than go the detour via "sting + R", as both words can be used to mean "cheat"?

[Jnyusa]

The thing is, I still don't see why someone shouldn't come up with "string" in response to "take for a ride" right away

Yes, that's what I did. And it does explain the clue 'horses' but not the clue 'outside.' When I saw Aravar's explanation I was going to post that it makes more sense than mine, but then I saw that Parma posted the solution himself.

My actual logical process was that 'string' is the only word in the English language that fits the existing letters, so let's see if we can explain the known answer in terms of the clue! But I don't know what the cryptic conventions are so my explanation was unnecessarily convoluted. I got string from s + ring and then t in the middle only because it had to be there. Aravar's explanation relied on conventions and was more elegant (as it should be for a cryptic) and I was sure that it would be correct even before reading Parma's post.

In crossword puzzles, too, a clue might be answerable by multiple words that all have the same number of letters, but only one of them will intersect with the other letters in the puzzle.

Jn

[Aravar]

It's a kind of puzzle that has certain conventions, I don't think I can explain it any clearer.

Conventions are fine, Parma, I'm just saying that we mustn't mix up conventions and logic. You claimed that the cryptic crossword is completely logical, and maybe it is so within its own conventions, but these conventions are arbitrary, and, (as almost everything depends on mutual acceptance of arbitrary conventions) in the case of cryptic crosswords, conventions that are particularly contrived (or so it seems to me), which, for me, detracts from whatever logic there may be in the use of these conventions.


Aravar, thanks for the further explanation! I do agree that it works that way, I'm just saying that to me this means that even if one knows the conventions much still depends on interpretation and common sense.

It is true, though, that the clue 'horses take for a ride' could also be used to produce the word string. If that were the clue, jnyusa's reasoning would be absolutely right.

So, the actual clue was just to make it more confusing?
The thing is, I still don't see why someone shouldn't come up with "string" in response to "take for a ride" right away, rather than go the detour via "sting + R", as both words can be used to mean "cheat"?

If one were being very strict one could object to 'string' meaning 'take for a ride' because it is 'string along' that means take for a ride, but sting of itslf does: it was the title of a movie on the subject with Paul Newman and Robert Redford.

It is not that the conventions are being mixed with logic. Certain things with crosswords are the premises from which the logic flows: that all solutions be real words or abbreviations, thatr the solution relate to the whole of the clue. In the same way the rules of a standard sudoku puzzle require that each row column and box of nine contins the numbers 1 to 9. That is arbitrary, but only in the same way that the rule that a bishop moves diagonally in chess is arbitrary.

What I have described as conventions are not arbitrary, nor are they rules: they are often double meanings, or less used definitions of the word. The art is finding out which is being used and why: part of the fun of the crossword is not only finding the answer, but also finding why it is the answer.

If you solve crosswords regularly you become familiar with the certina double meanings: as well as right for R (but not always, see below) one may find run for R as it is a cricket abbreviation. England or English is sometimes used for E, sailor sometimes gives AB (an abbreviation for Able Seaman) or TAR which is another word meaning a sailor, compass directions are often used and so on.

This means that there are a number of clues which can give the same answer: thinking about this yesterday I came up with:

Cruise table right on ship
Lead directors right on ship
Mckellen uninterested we hear. Larboard's the opposite
Southern sailor on a plank, opposite port
Confound rats with lumber. There's a green light that side

All those should give the same answer

[MithLuin]

"right on ship" = starboard (as does "opposite port")
Southern sailor on a plank = s + tar + board
Cruise table = ? board (as in, room and board)
Lead directors = star board (star meaning stellar, impressive; board meaning a board of directors)
Mckellan uninterested = (movie) star bored

I can guess that larboard is another name for port. I have no idea about the rats or the cruises, though .

Teremia, I think you should post the next one

[Aravar]

Cruise is the same as McKellen

[MithLuin]

Ah, I forgot about him .

But what are the rats?

Oh...rats is "star" scrambled, now I get it.