Comments on: Guardian 24,636/Rufus

By: Barnaby Page

Barnaby Page — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:16:51 +0000

Derek – I’m not sure I agree with your logic in 18. One can “cause a dog to be fed” or “feed a dog”; this does not mean that cause-feed!

By: Ralph G

Ralph G — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:54:45 +0000

I didn’t think, at 14 above, that 10a would give rise to such a productive debate. All sorted now, but solely for anyone wanting citations and accessing the OED on line, I recommend, of the 37 sections, 10c ’cause, originate’ 10e ‘provoke, give rise to’ and 15 ‘produce, bring into existence’. 10c cites as the object of ‘raise’: feuds, forment, controversy, quarrel, tumult, uproar, and fuss (1781-1997). 10e mentions ‘raise a laugh’ as frequent. 15 has ‘raised a storm (1968) and ‘raising tidal waves (1999)’.

By: Derek Lazenby

Derek Lazenby — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:21:10 +0000

Jonh, you be as pedantic as you like, it reminds us all of the details we may have forgotten. What I said was, as the Americans put it, my bad.

By: Paul B

Paul B — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:17:35 +0000

Raise hell = cause hell, and so I can’t see a problem – it’s a straight synonym. But Rebel = rise is not so easily parsed. Chambers will give you rise = ‘to revolt’, but the added ‘usu. with up’ does nothing to help fan of absolute accuracy.

By: John

John — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:28:16 +0000

If the rule really is “It’s OK if it’s in Chambers”, why isn’t it the prize crossword award rather than Collins? I’ve queried the Chambers is God statement before, and someone posted a comment at that time that in order to do a cryptic crossword such as the Guardian you really need a number of dictionaries. Further I have seen other dictionaries quoted on this blog by those with a shelf full.

Derek – I think we’re in agreement over the raise/cause issue, but

WRT “the first phrase (“cause an army to be raised”) suggests they are related but not the same. The second (“raise an army”) suggests you can replace one phrase with the other which says they are the same”.

“Cause an army to be raised” to me implies an indirect action, whereas “raise an army” is direct. If I get you to do it it’s one thing. If I do it myself it’s the other.
And “cause an army” doesn’t mean “raise an army”.
Pedantic I know but I like things to make grammatical sense.

By: Derek Lazenby

Derek Lazenby — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 19:34:10 +0000

And if you found “to cause to raise” Muck, then they can’t be equal otherwise that would be a tautology. Quite right, agree entirely.

By: muck

muck — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:30:58 +0000

Eileen #20. I wasn’t happy with RAISE=cause either. That’s why I commented. My first reading of Chambers 2008 also found only: to cause to rise; to cause to stand up or upright; to cause [land] to rise in view by approaching [naut.]; to cause [a lump] to swell. But other definitions include: bring into being; establish; institute. All synonyms of ’cause’.

By: Derek Lazenby

Derek Lazenby — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:06:33 +0000

insert at after not

By: smutchin

smutchin — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:06:23 +0000

…that said, agreeing or disagreeing with Chambers is irrelevant if the rules of the game are “It’s OK if it’s in Chambers”.

By: Derek Lazenby

Derek Lazenby — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:06:11 +0000

Not all. If you take away the talking at cross purposes there have been not many genuine differences.

Honest guv.