Please use the comments form attached to this page for any general feedback relating to the site.
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Peter on Notes for Azed 2,778
- Doctor Clue on Notes for Azed 2,778
- pythagtemp on Notes for Azed 2,778
- Doctor Clue on Notes for Azed 2,778
- Dfg on Notes for Azed 2,778
- Doctor Clue on Notes for Azed 2,778
- Tony McCoy O'Grady on Notes for Azed 2,778
- Doctor Clue on Thoughts
- Doctor Clue on Thoughts
- Anon Cues on Thoughts
I see we have “let slip” as anagrind, how about “let loose” and “unleashed”?
They sound good to me. I think that inflexions of ‘unleash’ are also valid as expulsion indicators (Chambers: ‘unleash’ = ‘to release (lit and fig)’)
Censored as expulsion?
I don’t think I can accept that one. When something (eg a film, a letter) is censored, it is subjected to a process of assessment. As a result, parts of it may be expunged, but equally it may emerge unscathed.
I was thinking it might be ok because as it can also be used more specifically. “The document had the name censored”
X with Y censored
Also “redacted”
“The names and email addresses of the users were redacted from the public data”
I agree though.. I’m struggling to find the dictionary definitions that match this usage..
I think that people on occasion use ‘censored’ and ‘redacted’ with the sense of ‘expunged’, but I believe that both properly relate to a process rather than a result. ‘Redacted’ is certainly valid as an anagrind based on the Chambers def.
Cream / creamed as anagrind?
Nice!
Sounded as homophone indicator?
“sound the rhymes clearly”
And the almost too obvious “sounds like”?
Thanks, Johannes
Based on the Chambers definitions, I would say that sounding, sounded and sounds are all valid – as well, of course, as ‘sounds like’. I’m going to have quite a big update to do later this week!
Would pearl be a fair charade for the letter O? Has the definition of something resembling or shaped like a pearl just like egg..
Or does is imply 3 dimensionality or something other than roundness in a way that sphere, blob and egg do not?
I think the assessment of shapes representing letters – or numbers which look like letters – is a tricky one, and the judgment of some candidates is going to be subjective.
If you allow anything that equates to zero, eg ‘love’, to indicate O, then ‘blob’ is fine – Chambers gives it as ‘a score of zero, a duck (cricket sl)’. ‘Duck’ or ‘duck egg’ qualify through the same route.
Chambers has ‘egg’ as “anything shaped like a hen’s egg”. Does that apply to the letter O? I would say so – I’m no expert, but I don’t think there’s much difference in shape between the output of a hen and a duck.
‘Round’ also has strong claims. ‘Sphere’ sounds very 3-dimensional, but if we allow ‘egg’ (equally 3-D), then I don’t see how we can disallow it.
And ‘pearl’? I’m afraid there’s nothing in Chambers which indicates that the word can be used to describe a shape, and the OED has it as suggesting a teardrop form. The first thing that springs to my mind as ‘pearl-shaped’ is a pearl light bulb, and that doesn’t look like an O. So that one gets a ‘no’ from me.
Thanks so much for the thoughtful insights as always!
You’re right, OED is specific about it relating to a pearl-like drop or globule.
Chambers seems more lenient though?
Noun “something resembling a pearl”
Adj “like a pearl in colour or shape”
Hmm..
Johannes – I think those definitions come not from ‘Chambers’ (ie The Chambers Dictionary, aka the Big Red Book) but from Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, a horse of a very different colour (blue).
Chambers itself doesn’t give any definitions for ‘pearl’ which involve similarities of shape, so I think ‘pearl’ for O would be a real stretch.
Aha! I was thinking it might be a case of wrong Chambers. Didn’t have the proper version on hand. I’ll be a bit more wary of it in future..
Frantic as anagram indicator?
Also perhaps “mouth” in the verb sense as containment? Too much of a stretch?
Thanks, Johannes
I reckon ‘frantic’ is an absolute shoo-in. It shall be added.
I’m less convinced about ‘mouth’. I can’t find any evidence of it being used figuratively, so it seems to me more like ‘yard’ (‘to enclose in a yard’) than, say, ‘vice’ (‘to grip, force, jam or strain as with a vice‘ [my italics]). Incidentally, I was slightly surprised to discover that the ‘articulate silently’ meaning of ‘mouth’ appears to be a recent (within the last 75 years) introduction to the language.
For “mouth” I meant in this sense: “To put or take (something, esp. food) in the mouth; to seize with the mouth; to touch (a thing) with the mouth or lips.”
“A wolf..can..mouth an egg without breaking it.”
R. Kipling, Jungle Book 6
Seems very similar to “lips” which is currently listed and marked advanced?
Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “mouth (v.), sense II.6.a,” March 2024
My problem is that I can only find the word used in the literal sense, as in the example that you quote and all those listed in the OED, and Chambers explicitly states that it means ‘to take in the mouth’. On the other hand, Chambers gives ‘lip’ as ‘to edge’ (likewise the OED – example: “the margin…lips the pool”), a transferred sense which ‘mouth’ just doesn’t seem to possess. It’s a perfectly fair suggestion, and I doubt whether its use would outrage solvers, but for me it doesn’t quite clear the bar.
Makes sense! I didn’t think of that meaning of “to lip”, that seems a lot fairer
I don’t understand why last Sunday’s Azed has been dissected. Isn’t it a prize puzzle? That’s what it says in ‘Rules and Requests’. I blog on fifteensquared (as John) and we are told not to publish the blog until the closing date has passed. My blog of this puzzle will appear on Sunday.
Hi Wil, and welcome to the blog.
I think it is a model which servers solvers of all levels well. The Sunday Telegraph’s Enigmatic Variations is similarly the subject of a ‘hints and tips’ blog on Big Dave’s site on publication day and a full review on fifteensquared after the closing date for entries. It’s important that these wonderful puzzles continue to be available and enjoyed, and that surely means doing all we can (i) to encourage new solvers, (ii) to enhance the experience of ‘regulars’, and (iii) to keep the number of entries as high as possible, this being the key yardstick by which publishers assess a puzzle’s value, and thus its justification for retention.
Hiccups / hiccuping as anagram indicator?
Chambers: “hiccup verb 1 intrans to produce a hiccup or hiccups. 2 intrans to falter, hesitate or malfunction.”
Sounds good to me! Consider it added.
Any thoughts on the idea that an anagram indicator should imply a permanent change to the subject?
I’m intrigued…before I head off on the wrong track, can you give a couple of examples of the sort of indicators that you’re thinking about in the non-permanent category?
On the subject of containment indicators..
I don’t see “during”. It seems to be quite commonly used.
Also “over” which can mean “so as to cover”.. “covers”/”covering” already being listed.
Thanks, Johannes
There are three containment/insertion indicators which I see quite regularly that I have deliberately excluded from the list because I don’t believe that they are sound:
DURING – This is invariably used in ‘real life’ to express a temporal relationship – ‘during the day’, ‘during an interval’. The OED definition , “Throughout the whole continuance of; hence, in the course of, in the time of. ” makes this clear. If I need an insertion indicator that can stand in for ‘during’, I use ‘part-way through’.
TOURING – I can’t accept that A ‘touring’ B suggests that A goes round the outside of B. ‘Going round’ is a good alternative.
TUCKING INTO – I’ve no problem with ‘tucked into’, but the only intransitive sense of the verb is “To make an onslaught upon food” (cf ‘slot’, ‘dig’).
However, I think there is a good case for OVER. Having a balaclava covering one’s head and a balaclava over one’s head seem like exactly the same thing. I suspect that I may have meant to add it at some point in the past, but it will be going in very shortly!
Appreciate your thoughts as always!
Interestingly.. “during” seems to be commonly used for insertion, but I can’t find any example of “over” being used for that purpose. From what I’ve seen it seems to be solely used for reversal, or as a connecting word in a down clue. I was expecting you to be ok with the former but not like the latter!
https://cryptics.georgeho.org/data/clues?_search=over&_sort=rowid
https://cryptics.georgeho.org/data/clues?_search=during&_sort=rowid
This also raises the question, should an indicator be omitted from the clinical data page because it is potentially dubious. I would argue that if the resource is targeted at solvers, then it should include anything they are likely to come across in a clue, regardless of whether it’s 100% fair. “during” definitely seems to fit that requirement.
Appreciate your thoughts as always!
Interestingly.. “during” seems to be commonly used for insertion, but I can’t find any example of “over” being used for that purpose. From what I’ve seen it seems to be solely used for reversal, or as a connecting word in a down clue. I was expecting you to be ok with the former but not like the latter!
This also raises the question, should an indicator be omitted from the clinical data page because it is potentially dubious. I would argue that if the resource is targeted at solvers, then it should include anything they are likely to come across in a clue, regardless of whether it’s 100% fair. “during” definitely seems to fit that requirement. Indicators that you think should be avoided by setters could feature that disclaimer, rather than being omitted entirely?
I don’t actually like ‘over’ much, and wouldn’t use it myself, but I can see a justification for it. I know that one could argue that in the phrase “a ring on his finger” there is a similar sense of containment, but this is where what we know from the real world tends to influence our interpretation of a word – something being on one’s head is very different from it covering one’s head.
Your question is a fair one, and I did once start a list of indicators which occur in puzzles but I consider unsound (it’s not just me – I have had support from other solvers regarding the three that I mentioned). The problem is that this would be a separate list, and therefore probably not much help to solvers. I have been reluctant to add any sort of ‘soundness’ column to the main tables, as the vast majority of anagram/containment/deletion indicators would be classed as ‘sound’. I decided when I started the lists to keep it simple and use TablePress; if I had opted for a SQL database I could have generated lists ‘on the fly’, along with some sort of consolidated matrix showing all indicators and their potential uses, sound or otherwise. However, I could still produce such a table based on a one-off data drop.
It’s fair to say that the individual lists are aimed primarily at clue writers and those seeking support (or otherwise) for indicators encountered in published puzzles, hence the exclusion of certain indicators that I consider unjustifiable.
I feel perhaps the single matrix (including indicators that I consider unsound but can be found in published puzzles – I can think of quite a few) might be the most useful addition to the site, both for solvers and for me, as it would stop me vetting the same words repeatedly, but I’m very happy to consider alternative suggestions.
Hello Dr Clue
First may I reiterate my thanks on the ongoing updates and maintenance of this wonderful resource.
Second, may I add that long ago both I and ‘Der ClueMeister’ RH concurred on the iffiness of ‘during’ — a purely temporal preposition — being used in the spatial sense demanded of insertion into a (written or online) grid. ‘He ate crisps during the performance’ doesn’t normally suggest that the crisps were _in_ the performance, a notable exception being Gary Lineker advertising Walkers apostrophe-less Crisps, of course.
Thanks Monk, your kind words are much appreciated.
Thank you also for your observations re ‘during’. It’s one of the ‘allowable’ indicators that I feel most strongly about.
Just checking contginment indicators, and I noticed that “inside” was not included. It’s an obvious one (I thought!) – maybe too obvious?
Welcome Jrsee, and thanks for your comment
‘Inside’ is actually already in there, but it is listed in the ‘Alternative form(s)’ column of the entry for ‘in’. Taking your comment into account, though, I am minded to give it an entry of its own, since as well as being a preposition it can be a noun, adjective or adverb with meanings different from ‘in’ for the corresponding parts of speech.
Came up with an idea the other day, and then discovered it had already been done (of course)
Interlacing two words to form a 3rd.
Haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere, as I guess it’s quite a hard thing to get to work, but wonder if it would be nice to mention it here somewhere?
e.g.
Work belonging to us interlaced through the night (6)
https://bigdave44.com/2018/12/14/toughie-2143/
I also thought of the potential “taking turns with”. Would that be fair? Would obviously fit a lot nicer into a surface than interlaced.. and seems pretty unambiguous when interpreted as wordplay
The other thing I wondered is what are the rules? (maybe it’s too rare a device for them to even exist?)
Do both words have to be interlaced as completely as possible?
e.g.
12345 interlaced with ABCDE
A1B2C3D4E5
or could this also be acceptable? (with an offset)
AB1C2D3E45
Interested to hear your thoughts!
Hi Johannes, and thanks for raising some interesting points.
First of all, let me say that I am very comfortable with the concept of interlacing two words to form another. Indeed, it is something that Azed does from time to time in his clues.
I think that it merits coverage on a page in this site – perhaps combined with other relatively unusual constructions – but I’ll offer a few thoughts below. Note that in my examples I explicitly give the words to be intertwined, but in practice they would most likely be indicated by other words in the wordplay, eg ‘belonging to us’ for OUR in the OEUVRE example.
I reckon anything that suggests the two words being interwoven is fine for ABABAB… – interlaced, interwoven, alternating, taking turns etc. So ‘CUE alternating with ASS’ could be CAUSES. Could ‘ASS alternating with CUE’ legitimately produce the same result (BABABA)? My instinct says ‘no’, but on reflection I think it probably could.
What about ‘COT alternating with ASS’ for COASTS, ie AABBAB (similar to your AB1C2… example)? Definitely not, ‘alternating’ being very specific in its meaning. But ‘COT intertwined with ASS’ could certainly be considered for COASTS, although personally I would prefer ‘COT irregularly intertwined with ASS’ or words to that effect.
Words such as ‘linked’ offer other possibilities. ‘CUE regularly linked with ASS’ would work for CAUSES, while without qualification a looser connection is suggested, probably just the last letter of the first word passing the first letter of the second – ‘SPOT linked with RING’ for SPORTING (ie [A..A]BA[B..B]) seems ok to me.
When I have time, I’ll look at putting together a page with some complete examples, but I hope that in the meantime the above may be helpful.
Would you say “ending” was a fair “After” juxtaposition indicator and should be added to the list?
e.g. X ending Y = YX
Good question! My first thought was ‘yes’, but on reflection I’m not so sure. If X ‘ends’ Y, I think that X is invariably part of Y, eg ‘A fast movement ends the concerto’, rather than being an adjunct, as in eg ‘an interval follows the concerto’. It’s a close thing, but on balance I’m inclined to say ‘no’; I’d be more willing to accept ‘X ending Y’ as meaning that X should be moved to the end of Y, eg ‘section ending play’ for PORTS. Approximate synonyms such as ‘concluding’ and ‘finishing’ strike me as having a similar issue, but I think that ‘X at end of Y’ is fine for YX (‘an interval at the end of the first half’), and I will add it.
I am also minded to include ‘tipping’ and ‘tailing’, both of which suggest the addition of something (‘tailing’ should be in there anyway with its sense of following closely).
As always, though, I’m open to argument or expressions of indignation.
I see the issue now, you’re right that doesn’t seem to quite work when the verb “end” is interpreted like that.
But how about with this alternate meaning (from OED):
III.8. transitive. To furnish with an end of a particular kind, for protection or ornament.
X ended with/in Y would mean X furnished with a tip of Y.
Edit: oh I see you’ve added “tipped”, I guess this would be a synonym?
I did consider that definition, but the sole example would seem to indicate that the subject of the verb is the person doing the furnishing, not the thing stuck on, which would be preceded by the preposition ‘with’. That contrasts with the verb tip, which OED has similarly as ‘to furnish with a tip’, but also as ‘to adorn with a tip’, where the tipping thing is the subject of the verb, as the examples confirm.
It’s certainly borderline, and I’m pretty sure that among the lists on this site you would find several indicators with weaker claims for inclusion. However, I’m inclined to be strict when it comes to juxtaposition indicators, since they don’t contribute very much to a clue cryptically (with the ones that result in XY contributing nothing).
Hey there, thanks for the incredibly useful resource!
Just wanted to suggest the addition of “violated” as anagram indicator.
Hi Johannes, glad you find the site useful
Thanks for that suggestion. I will add ‘violated’ to the anagram indicator list. I will also add the adjective ‘violate’ (=’violated, defiled’) in the advanced category.
Good evening Dr Clue.
Just noticed that, when ordering the Anagram Indicators by function, “wriggles”, alone labelled “Present indicative” rather than the other “Verb indicative(s)”, is concomitantly sandwiched between the last “Past participle” and first “Present participle”. Please consider this missive as an example of audience participlation. 😉
Good evening Monk, and thank you for your participant missive.
I have corrected the anomaly; editing the anagrind list reminded me that a while ago I had spotted that there were two identical occurrence of ‘fudge’ (mmmm, fudge), one of which has now been seen to.
Good day, Dr Clue
When consulting the juxtaposition-indicator list, it occurred to me that I am all but certain that (for a down clue) I’ve seen “A held up by B” to mean {A< in B} rather than the intended juxtaposition {AB}. To my mind {A< in B} must surely be indicated by "A up held by B" or "B holding/holds A up" because the operand A must be adjacent to its reversal operator "up". Or must it? Is it acceptable to interpret "A held up" as "A held [when it's] up", in a similar way that convention accepts "A B holds" to mean "A [that] B holds". Thank you.
Good day to you too
That’s an interesting one. I’m confident that I’ve seen ‘held up’ used in just the way you describe, and I’m not sure that I’ve ever given it too much thought. In the phrase ‘large, jolly man held upside-down by chimney’, the mental image created matches exactly what we want from ‘X held upside-down by Y’, ie the man, inverted, in the grip of the chimney. But there is a problem with this – what we are actually being told is not that the man is inside the chimney, rather than he is upside-down and the chimney is maintaining him in that position. Because we know the geometry of a chimney, we infer that the man is inside it, but if we were to read, say, ‘man held upside-down by two chimneys’, we might think again.
So even if one accepts that ‘upside-down’ could be replaced by ‘up’ without changing the meaning, I feel sure that you are right, and the order of the words is key. ‘A holding B up’ is fine, I think, for either [A around B<] or [(A around B)<], but 'A held up by B' means [AB], or possibly [A< + B] if you accept 'by' for juxtaposition in a down clue (very questionable, I'd say), but not [B< in A]. One of those situations, I reckon, where an apparently confirmatory 'real life' usage is not what it seems.
Apologies for the late thanks for your reply, Dr Clue, but I’ve been a tad ‘held up’ … 😉
Good evening Dr C. In addition to yesterday’s thankfully (very quickly) resolved ‘quirky’ query, might ‘banning’, ‘relieving’ and ‘rendering’ — the last two at the suggestion of esteemed ClueMeister Richard Heald — be similarly added to the expulsion list? Thanks again.
Thanks, Monk
Ooh, I’ve had to work my brain harder this time…
First the easy one. ‘Render’, together with its inflections, is clearly an omission. It carries exactly the sense required, and for good measure appears in a winning Azed clue. Approved nem con, and I look forward to using ‘excellent services rendered’ to indicate the loss of ACES.
‘Ban’ is one that I’ve looked at before, and on which I’ve previously struggled to make a judgment. On the one hand, I doubt that solvers would have any problem with it; on the other, it seems to me to suggest not being allowed in, rather than being there originally and then kicked out – ‘He was ejected from the ground and subsequently banned’. I’m not keen on the active form, but there are several examples at &lit of the passive being used, and therefore I’m minded to include the past participle ‘banned’. That’s probably illogical, but I like ‘Y banned from X’ more than ‘X banning Y’.
Now the tough one. I fear I must disagree with the ClueMeister, although I know that the sole example of ‘relieving’ in the &lit archive is from the great man himself. I do feel, though, that on occasion what is acceptable to Azed (where clue writers have the chance to explain their clues) may be less acceptable to solvers who must rely on knowledge or limited works of reference. I am always wary of including indicators which I think are likely to leave solvers struggling to parse a clue even when they’ve got the answer. Chambers gives ‘release’ as a meaning of ‘relieve’, but the object is typically the person being released, with the troublesome thing following the preposition ‘from’. OED does have a ‘chiefly Scottish, now rare’ sense that would fit the bill, but I generally draw the line at ‘rare’ meanings, as they can be hard for solvers to locate. That said, I’m very comfortable with the euphemistic ‘relieved of’ for expulsion, and I also note that ‘relieving’ and ‘relieved by’ are missing from the replacement indicator list, which seems like an oversight.
I’ll make the updates, and I am of course open to persuasion – though if I saw ‘X relieving Y’ in a clue I’d expect it to mean ‘X replacing Y’, and I think I might be unhappy if it turned out that X was getting rid of Y without taking its place.
Hi Dr C. Re ‘to release’ as one of Chambers’ meanings of ‘relieve’, I take your point about the object being typically the person seeking release ‘from’ some troublesome thing. Typically, yes … but not exclusively. Surely the object can also be the troublesome thing itself, such as pain (as in my CACOGASTRIC clue to which you refer) or tension (as in my more recent clue to MALIK) … or, indeed, the troublesome surplus letters blighting an anagram? Chambers’ bald definition ‘to release’ makes no such stipulation as to its correct usage, so for that reason surely we can have no objection to the use of ‘relieving’ as a deletion indicator? Your painstakingly compiled indicator lists are valuable tools to clue-writers both professional and amateur (like me), but I wonder: are they intended to be an exhaustive guide to devices that might be encountered in Azed and elsewhere (regardless of perceived soundness/unsoundness), or do they reflect your own personal tastes?
Hi RJHe
I did think long and hard about ‘relieves’/’relieving’ but I feel sure that ‘relieving pain’ draws on the OED’s sense 4a, ‘To ease or mitigate (what is painful or oppressive); to render less grievous or burdensome’. There is no mention of elimination, and I don’t believe that pain relief or famine relief result in freedom from pain/famine, only a reduction in severity.
I think ‘personal tastes’ might be putting it a little strongly, but the lists certainly reflect my personal judgment, right or wrong. I’m sure that I am guilty on occasion of inconsistency, sometimes accepting a bald Chambers definition (particularly with well-established indicators) while at other times actively seeking out clarification of a particular meaning. I have never intended that the lists should be exhaustive in terms of including every device that one might encounter in a published crossword; it did cross my mind at one time that I could include ‘obelised’ indicators, but I felt that would make the lists unnecessarily complicated. Therefore I have simply excluded indicators such as ‘touring’ and ‘during’ because I just don’t think they are sound. There are devices used in some puzzles (such as the ‘lift and separate’, eg ‘suntan’ = s-lash) that I would never use and would not include, even though the solvers of those particular puzzles are usually familiar with the device and happily accept it. I originally put the lists together for my own (decidedly amateur) use – I am delighted that others have found them useful and contributed considerably to their enhancement, but I realize that no two setters will ever fully agree on what is acceptable and what is not, let alone any two solvers.