Comments on: Guardian 25,462 – Araucaria

By: Van Winkle

Van Winkle — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:15:31 +0000

… and it would only work on a presumption that you are dealing in capital letters – how does “attraction” become “ALLURE”?

By: Sil van den Hoek

Sil van den Hoek — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 23:58:13 +0000

Or perhaps better “if I were to get”.

By: tupu

tupu — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:20:36 +0000

Hi PaulB @42

Thanks again. I took your point about Araucaria as a ‘special case’ and also understood your problem re the grammar and the suggestion that it is really wonky. I think our reading is much the same – as exactly (pedantically) as I can parse it, he’s saying ‘this is flop = failure which would be fallure if the ‘i’ got a bit of line at the bottom’.

Hi Sil

The simplest (one letter) workable correction (while maintaining the ambiguity of I) would be to change ‘get’ to ‘got’.

By: Paul B

Paul B — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:57:26 +0000

If a certain eminent grammarian, who generally posts in another place, is right, it certainly looks that way. I was wondering if the clue might involve some subtle deployment of the subjunctive, but the eminent person says not. Stella, OTOH, isn’t at all convinced!

By: Sil van den Hoek

Sil van den Hoek — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:26:39 +0000

Hi tupu & Paul, if you’re still there.
My interpretation of the order of the transformation is just like Paul stated at the end of #42. Bit awkward perhaps, but it didn’t worry me [it's Araucaria after all].

But Paul, I am surely right [given a recent discussion] that ‘get’ should be something else too (like ‘will get’ or ‘would get’ or similar)?
Am I right?

By: Paul B

Paul B — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:14:32 +0000

I think quite a few of us are with you on that Tupu, my point above being that while odd for crosswords it’s not particularly odd for Araucaria: he says ‘this would be F-ALLURE, were the I in FAILURE morphed to become L’. Right?

By: tupu

tupu — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:11:42 +0000

HI Sil
‘Now here’s the problem: if I [the symbol I] *getS* a bit of a bottom line, it would become an L (which transforms F/ALLURE into F/AILURE)’.

My point @17 is that it transforms F/ailure into F/allure (not the other way round).

By: Sil van den Hoek

Sil van den Hoek — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 22:43:26 +0000

Stella, I think, it is like below.

First part of the clue – “Flop is its first attraction …..”
“Flop” [the definition] = [is] F [its first, the first letter of 'Flop'] ALLURE [attraction] …..

The second part of the clue – “….. if I get a bit of a bottom line”
Now here’s the problem: if I [the symbol I] *getS* a bit of a bottom line, it would become an L (which transforms F/ALLURE into F/AILURE).
That little S attached to ‘get’, that’s Paul’s problem.
Turn to the recent Philistine puzzle to see a similar discussion.
Paul’s surely right (again), but unlike on that Philistine occasion there’s hardly anyone tonight who sees the point he’s making.

By: Paul B

Paul B — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 22:43:02 +0000

Well, the surface is difficult to place in everyday speech, but nevertheless: I’m interested in how ‘if (an element singular) get (something)’ is not a problem for you!

By: Stella Heath

Stella Heath — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 22:00:26 +0000

I haven’t commented until now on Paul B’s beef today, having got it from crossing letters and wordplay and not stopped to think more about it.

Grammatically, it’s sound, and “if” always introduces a subordinate conditional clause. I think the trouble here is that the surface reading means nothing, but at the same time it’s suggestive – “flop is its main attraction” is semantically paradoxical, to say the least.