Guardian Cryptic 27,024 by Nutmeg

43 comments on “Guardian Cryptic 27,024 by Nutmeg”

1. Thanks, Loonapick. I loved 1d and 3d. I agree – not as difficult as Nutmeg can sometimes be – perhaps we are in for an easy week, following yesterday’s lightish Rufus?

   PS – I think the ST in STEALTHY is indicated by “S[ocialis]t extremely”.

2. 8 down is ‘socialist extremely’ = st, so not an abbreviation.
   Thanks for the blog, Loonapick and thanks to Nutmeg for a crossword that I thought was tricky in places.

3. Thanks Nutmeg and Loonapic.

   I liked CHAPERONE but it was one of 2 clues with definition in (or near) the middle which threw a novice expecting them to be at the beginning or end. Last one in ELOPING.

4. Thanks Nutmeg and loonapick

   Lovely. Delayed a little by trying “stopping train” for 4d (forgetting it wasn’t a Rufus!). Favourites were OVEREMPHASIS, CHAPERONE and THREE DAY EVENT (yes, I took the definition to be “meeting up” – i.e. a riding event).

5. Thanks, loonapick.

   A lovely puzzle, I thought, with super anagrams in OVEREMPHASIS and THREE-DAY EVENT and great clues for PAROCHIAL and CHAPERONE, among several others.

   Elegant and witty throughout, as usual. Many thanks, Nutmeg – most enjoyable.

6. Thanks, Nutmeg and loonapick. I would give the inverse of loonapick’s summary – a couple of straightforward clues hidden among mostly excellent fare.

7. A little easier than some of Nutmeg’s puzzles, but still a very nice puzzle.

   Thanks to Nutmeg and loonapick

8. Thank you loonapick, agree with your brief summary.

   I wondered if the easiest clue at 1a (FORECAST) was a deliberate lull as it went in so quickly.

   Muffin @4 Me too with ‘stopping train’ and then also ‘starting block’ but rejected for lack of plural. Good clue in the end, though.

   I do think Nutmeg makes a nice job of concealment whilst retaining some surface to the clue. Many thanks.

   Nice week, all.

9. Sort of all right, though with a few moderate clues eg TENSE. Comfortably in my difficulty range, though NE was a bit tricky until at 8d I stopped trying to force in ‘extremely rich’ RH and went with ‘socialist, extremely’ instead. That’s the sort of misdirection I like.

10. Enjoyed this one a lot, mainly because it was a Nutmeg I could finish, but I don’t think sceptic and cynic are synonymous.

11. As others have said, some nice misdirection scattered about here. I’ve known Nutmeg be more tricky than this, but I was pleased to be able to get it all out.

    Enjoyable puzzle. OVEREMPHASIS was very good.

    Brava, Nutmeg, and thanks to loonapick for the blog.

12. This was fun, but I have a couple of issues with 7d. First, it does not quite seem to work with the two extra words on the end of the clue. And, secondly, I am struggling to see how ‘reunions’ = ‘family do’. Surely it should be family dos. Other than that, it was enjoyable, and interesting to find out that baroque means highly ornamental (until today I had just thought that it was the name of the period).

13. Thank you Nutmeg and loonapick.

    A lovely puzzle, such elegant clues. The SW corner with CANINE and DOGMATIC was the last filled, great fun. CYNIC now seems to be accepted as as a synonym of sceptic, the COED gives sceptic 1 a person inclined to doubt all accepted opinions; a cynic.

14. Thanks Nutmeg and loonapick

    I was also initially doubtful about equating SCEPTIC and CYNIC, but Chambers eThesaurus cross-references them in both directions, so it seems OK after all.

15. I agree with others about CHAPERONE, 3D, which was fun, as was ELOPING at 24a.

    Thanks to Nutmeg and Loonapick.

    Interesting to find CINC in CYNIC at 6a, as it also appeared as part of the clue for CINCINATTI in yesterday’s Rufus.

16. A lovely puzzle, even if at the easier end of Nutmeg’s range. Favourite was CHAPERONE, with OVEREMPHASIS and ELOPING not far behind.

    Thanks, Nutmeg and loonapick.

17. This was very enjoyable with some lovely clues. I really liked CHAPERONE and SLEEPING PILLS. (The latter very Rufus-ish!)

    My only quibble was with 7d. As j2o says @12, the clue seems to require a singular solution. And while a reunion could be a family event, the word brings to mind school reunions and the like more readily (at least to me).

    But this was one relatively minor point in what was overall a really nice puzzle.

18. j2o @12 and JimS @17, the plural of do is dos or do’s, I think the definition of 7d is meant to be “family do’s”.

19. Please accept my apologies if I included a spoiler in my comment for anyone who was saving yesterday’s Rufus.

20. Julie @19, I would not think anyone doing this crossword would be saving Rufus for later – I’m waiting for someone to complain about the apostrophe @18!

21. Cookie @18: I see that some dictionaries allow do’s as a plural. This seems to me analogous to allowing apple’s and orange’s as plurals on the grounds that many greengrocers use them that way – but fair enough!

    Julie in Australia @19: I think it’s perfectly ok to refer to a clue in a previous crossword where the solution has been published.

22. An enjoyable puzzle, which I found just right for me, i.e. not too easy. I liked 3d CHAPERONE and 14d PAINTWORK particularly.

    Thanks to Nutmeg and loonapick.

23. et violà, JimS @21, yes, I checked in the COED before posting @18…

24. Cookie and JimS

    As I see it, the setter found a good surface for 7d REUNIONS, knowing also that it could mislead us with an apparent singular form (‘family do is the result’). The last two words (‘the result’) otherwise play no part, and there is no question that the answer is indicated by the plural “family do’s”.

    An elegant clue, you might say! Well, the surface certainly was.

25. I wondered if the apostrophe in do’s might surface at some time and @18-21 I see it has. Regular plurals are just an s on the end, so strictly dos is the plural of do, not do’s. But does ‘dos’ look like a word? Sometimes it’s an es, but ‘does’ has already been taken by female deer. The closest analogy I can think of is in dotting the i’s and similar. Dotting the is would just look plain wrong.

26. There are three as in banana, Trailman, which is why I would always write ‘there are three a’s in banana’. Don’t get me going about apostrophes. My blood pressure it too high already.

27. KD @26
    Good example, but wouldn’t it be better to write: there are three “a”s in “banana”?

28. Thanks to Nutmeg and loonapick. I missed ST = [s]ocialis[t] for STEALTHY and took a while getting THREE DAY EVENT but got through and much enjoyed the process. Unless I missed it, no one commented on ELF turning up twice in one form or another.

29. Rather a gentle puzzle I thought. I sometimes have difficulty either this setter but not today. I can’t say I saw a problem with REUNIONS:I certainly put it in without a qualm. I liked SLEEPING PILLS.
    Thanks Nutmeg.

30. Eileen got all my favorites. I especially loved OVEREMPHASIS.

31. Apostrophes! At the risk of bringing on heart-attacks, including mine,I quote from a book on grammar published in 1958. The third use of the apostrophe is “To form the plurals of letters and of numbers written in figures”. Examples given include these.How many “c’s” in “necessary”? In the 1890’s. I suppose you could stretch that to include two-letter words where the apostrophe is an aid to understanding.Mind you, those inverted commas don’t help to clarify things and if I had put them in for all the quotations, what a forest of little lines I would have had. Keep calm, my fellow punctuationistas.

32. Thanks to all for an enjoyable puzzle.

    I got stuck on 21d where I put PIANO (OK, IAN would probably have been clued as “Scot” rather than “fellow” and piano isn’t soft but not necessarily delicate) which got me into all sorts of trouble in the SW corner until I thought again.

33. I can’t keep calm, Elaine, because I want to have your babies.

    However, your grammar book – almost as ancient as I am – is wrong. The sexual revolution took place in the
    1960s, not the 1960’s. However, 1960’s best-selling album was … well, whatever it was – probably Petula Clark or some such.

    I love this thread in a special way and think that we may be going off on one here.

34. We may have much to discuss about punctuation. It is a subject dear to my heart as it clearly is to yours. I like your style, Kathryn’s Dad.

35. I come belatedly to the punctuation thread originated by Kathryn’s Dad @26 and muffin @27 and continued by Elaine and others.

    English syntax supports the construction of a phrase describing the relationship between the letter a and bananas. For example, “the letter a is used three times in the word bananas”. There is no requirement for an apostrophe.

    The writer may choose to enhance clarity by using quotation marks, single or double, around the letter a in the sub-phrase “letter a” or around the word bananas.

    Having worked in the discipline of Information Technology for a long time I have a predisposition to disambiguation. I apologize in advance if this is interpreted as pedantry. As suggested by Elaine the subject of punctuation may provoke considerable discussion and I await this with interest.

36. Well I agree with those (well put, K’s dad) who think 7dn is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Had Nutmeg written “family dos” my only comment would have been on its simplicity. As it is, I feel as though she has added her, highly talented, muscle to the grocers rolling back the order of our beautiful language. (As have the esteemed apologists here and the producers of woolly 1958 grammars!). I may have to retire to a darkened room…..

    That apart, a pretty good puzzle; I enjoyed CHAPERONE though I’ve a feeling we’ve seen it before?
    Many thanks to Nutmeg and loonapick.

37. pagan @35

    I’m not sure if you are aware of the General Discussion page on this site (click on GENERAL DISCUSSION at the top of the page). It is intended for general topics of interest that break out of crossword blogs, and I think the subject of apostrophes in plurals and how to avoid them might have reached that point.

    I’m sure there’s much more to say after an interesting start!

38. William F P @36, I am sure Nutmeg knew what she was doing, unnecessary apostrophes are sometimes put in to mislead the solver and are to be disregarded in crossword clues, answers and definitions, so all this discussion, which we have had several times before, was unnecessary.

39. William F P @36

    I think I count as one of your esteemed apologists*, in which case I would just like to point out that both forms of the plural of ‘do’ are correct (“dos” and “do’s”), as Cookie commented @18. In my comment @24 I was quoting from a different authority, but both are in agreement on this point.

    As for the 1958 grammar mentioned by Elaine, I have studied it for 55 years and can tell you it is far from woolly.

    *temporary title: expires after first use

40. Alan B – As I’ve much respect for your judgement, derived from your comments and our earlier colloquy(ies), I must gladly withdraw “woolly” as descriptive of the book (its name of has not been revealed!) and trust that none has been offended. Concerning your, and cookie’s, other remarks – I had indeed read and noted them before I posted mine. (I’m one of those who consider it impolite to comment without having read others’ comments fully first).
    cookie – your remarks about use of apostrophes by setters are spot on and echo exactly the conclusions I reached many decades ago.

    However, I shall go to my death bed clutching to my ebbing body the firm belief that “do’s” as the plural of “do” is an insult to our language with which I am not prepared to associate myself…. (I shudder to think what my classics masters – or even my mother – would have made of such a ‘construction’!)

    Sorry.

    Love and respect.

41. William F P @40

    I was surprised and delighted to read your polite response after such a time lapse. No need for an apology.

    While leaving KD and Elaine to have apostrophic discussions in their own style I’ll come back to the particular point about the plural of ‘do’. I think the form “do’s” is a hangover from when plurals of very short words were given an apostrophe to eliminate the possibility that they could be confused with completely different words. In the case of ‘do’ that word would be ‘dos’, but as this is not a word in English, except as the plural of ‘do’, there is no confusion: hence “do’s” as a plural is not necessary.

    Now we have, as you know, “dos and don’ts”, “ifs and buts” (or “ifs, buts and maybes”) and no doubt a few others where previously apostrophes would be routinely inserted. But please note that good authorities do still allow both “dos” and “do’s” as the plural form of ‘do’.

    I would just add that you must still have an apostrophe in such constructions as “How many a’s in ‘bananas’?”, as some-one mentioned earlier.

    Finally, how would you write “Mind your p’s and q’s.”? I’ll leave that thought with you.

42. Alan – another late, but fully honest, answer. I would write “Ps and Qs” (if only to avoid a self-induced fit of the vapours!)

43. I enjoyed this puzzle quite a bit, but perhaps the apostrophe conversation more!

    Thanks to all for the erudition and avoidance of the DOGMATIC. (Which I always wished was equipment for cleaning up after my CANINE.)

Comments are closed.