<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Financial Times 13,021 / Dante</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/</link>
	<description>Never knowingly undersolved.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 00:57:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Agentzero</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/#comment-73465</link>
		<dc:creator>Agentzero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:07:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=6191#comment-73465</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you, Eileen.  I liked 3dn as well.  I forgot to mention that I thought 22dn, while fairly easy, was also a good clue, aided by the fact that in a reference to nuns, &quot;superior&quot; could mean, specifically, a Mother Superior.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, Eileen.  I liked 3dn as well.  I forgot to mention that I thought 22dn, while fairly easy, was also a good clue, aided by the fact that in a reference to nuns, &#8220;superior&#8221; could mean, specifically, a Mother Superior.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Agentzero</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/#comment-73464</link>
		<dc:creator>Agentzero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=6191#comment-73464</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rishi, thanks for your gentle hint!  I have secured the use of a Chambers for future blogging.

I should have been clearer in my comment on 27a.  I had no problem with the surface reading.  My comment had to do with the cryptic reading:  I would have defined a STICKER as something that &quot;stays on,&quot; rather than something that &quot;keeps on&quot; -- and, as you note, that would have worked with the surface sense as well.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rishi, thanks for your gentle hint!  I have secured the use of a Chambers for future blogging.</p>
<p>I should have been clearer in my comment on 27a.  I had no problem with the surface reading.  My comment had to do with the cryptic reading:  I would have defined a STICKER as something that &#8220;stays on,&#8221; rather than something that &#8220;keeps on&#8221; &#8212; and, as you note, that would have worked with the surface sense as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eileen</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/#comment-73419</link>
		<dc:creator>Eileen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:52:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=6191#comment-73419</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Congratulations on your first blog, Agentzero! 

As you say, very straightforward, though I share your reservations about 23ac and 19dn. Like you, I really liked 1ac and I thought the surface of 3dn was very clever.

I learned &#039;mean = near&#039; from crosswords - and, interestingly, &#039;close&#039; means the same.

I wouldn&#039;t say 17dn was a double definition, although I&#039;m sure it&#039;s meant to be - I&#039;m not questioning your interpretation! None of my dictionaries gives two distinct meanings; I think &#039;spontaneous&#039; is inferred from &#039;received or known by simple inspection and direct apprehension&#039; [Chambers] or &#039;that consists in immediate apprehension, without the intervention of any reasoning process&#039; [SOED]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congratulations on your first blog, Agentzero! </p>
<p>As you say, very straightforward, though I share your reservations about 23ac and 19dn. Like you, I really liked 1ac and I thought the surface of 3dn was very clever.</p>
<p>I learned &#8216;mean = near&#8217; from crosswords &#8211; and, interestingly, &#8216;close&#8217; means the same.</p>
<p>I wouldn&#8217;t say 17dn was a double definition, although I&#8217;m sure it&#8217;s meant to be &#8211; I&#8217;m not questioning your interpretation! None of my dictionaries gives two distinct meanings; I think &#8216;spontaneous&#8217; is inferred from &#8216;received or known by simple inspection and direct apprehension&#8217; [Chambers] or &#8216;that consists in immediate apprehension, without the intervention of any reasoning process&#8217; [SOED]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C.G. Rishikesh</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/#comment-73410</link>
		<dc:creator>C.G. Rishikesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=6191#comment-73410</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[... take &#039;watch&#039; as a noun meaning &quot;watchman&quot; - in the surface reading, of course. In wordplay it gives &#039;ticker&#039;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230; take &#8216;watch&#8217; as a noun meaning &#8220;watchman&#8221; &#8211; in the surface reading, of course. In wordplay it gives &#8216;ticker&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C.G. Rishikesh</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/#comment-73408</link>
		<dc:creator>C.G. Rishikesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:54:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=6191#comment-73408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[27a: I would think &quot;keep on&quot; is OK. Only, we would say &quot;keep on watching&quot; not &quot;keep on watch&quot;. Your suggestion &#039;stay on&#039; seems to fix this prob.
Come to think of it, &quot;keep on watch&quot; itself is OK if we understand that &quot;keep on&quot; means &quot;to continue to remind someone to do something&quot; and take &#039;watch&#039; as a noun meaning &quot;watchman&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>27a: I would think &#8220;keep on&#8221; is OK. Only, we would say &#8220;keep on watching&#8221; not &#8220;keep on watch&#8221;. Your suggestion &#8216;stay on&#8217; seems to fix this prob.<br />
Come to think of it, &#8220;keep on watch&#8221; itself is OK if we understand that &#8220;keep on&#8221; means &#8220;to continue to remind someone to do something&#8221; and take &#8216;watch&#8217; as a noun meaning &#8220;watchman&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C.G. Rishikesh</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/#comment-73405</link>
		<dc:creator>C.G. Rishikesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:39:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=6191#comment-73405</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re 19a: Chambers, &quot;the crossword addict&#039;s favourite tool&quot; as proclaimed in the preface to an edition, has
&lt;b&gt;chew the fat&lt;/b&gt; to keep on arguing the point]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re 19a: Chambers, &#8220;the crossword addict&#8217;s favourite tool&#8221; as proclaimed in the preface to an edition, has<br />
<b>chew the fat</b> to keep on arguing the point</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C.G. Rishikesh</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2009/03/10/financial-times-13021-dante/#comment-73403</link>
		<dc:creator>C.G. Rishikesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:36:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=6191#comment-73403</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re 25a: Yes, &quot;near&quot; does have the meaning &quot;mean&quot;. Noted in COD as archaic.
Chambers too has it but the meanings given are &quot;thriftily, parsimoniously&quot; (marked archaic).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re 25a: Yes, &#8220;near&#8221; does have the meaning &#8220;mean&#8221;. Noted in COD as archaic.<br />
Chambers too has it but the meanings given are &#8220;thriftily, parsimoniously&#8221; (marked archaic).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
