Re: SCWC 86 results
- From: Flying Tortoise <purple.mug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 09:16:59 -0700 (PDT)
On Aug 3, 12:05 am, Steve Ball <pretty.g...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Flying Tortoise:
On Aug 1, 9:53 pm, Brian Westley <west...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Flying Tortoise <purple....@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Aug 1, 2:19=A0pm, Steve Ball <pretty.g...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Flying Tortoise:
On Jul 30, 9:47=A0am, Steve Ball <pretty.g...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Flying Tortoise:
s=B9Dropped off outside riotous hustings, I was recognised (13)
DI(HUSTINGSI anagram)ED
Pretty well done. My only quibble is the use of the past tense =8Cwa=
to introduce the definition.
I hate to quibble over a quibble but I kinda have to point out that
DISTINGUISHED, whether as verb or participle, is past tense!
oIn the cryptic reading, it's just a word. The moderator is objecting t=
n't"[wordplay] _was_ [definition]", when it still is. "Is" obviously does=
Iwork in the surface; what about "Dropped off outside riotous hustings,=
might be recognised (13)"? Works for me.
Then he is mistaken in his interpretation. "Was recognised" is the
definition in toto. The "was" is not in any sense a linking word.
Huh? Can you give me an example where "distinguished" is synonymous withProbably not. But I said already the justification is a 'tad
"was recognised"?
contrived', namely that one is distinguished because one was
recognised.
How about:
"He distinguished red from green in the colorblindness test yesterday"
Needs the passive. More along the lines of ...
The elite guard, distingusihed by its silver trappings, came under the
heaviest fire.
And that equates with: "The elite guard, was recognised by its silver
trappings, came under the heaviest fire"? One of us is missing something.
No, not directly as I already indicated. Geez! Is there some part of
"I think there is a case to be made for the latter
but it is perhaps a tad contrived for a standard clue" that wasn't
clear? Or are you looking for a public declaration of 'mea culpa' with
me prostrate upon the steps of the OED perhaps? Move on. We all have!
.
- References:
- Re: SCWC 86 results
- From: Steve Ball
- Re: SCWC 86 results
- From: Flying Tortoise
- Re: SCWC 86 results
- From: Brian Westley
- Re: SCWC 86 results
- From: Flying Tortoise
- Re: SCWC 86 results
- From: Steve Ball
- Re: SCWC 86 results
- Prev by Date: Re: SCWC 86 results
- Next by Date: Re: SCWC 87
- Previous by thread: Re: SCWC 86 results
- Next by thread: Re: SCWC 87
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading