Azed 2447

14 comments on “Azed 2447”

1. Thanks to both. The usual meander through parts of the dictionary not in common use. As always it was enjoyable although it was also a DNF for me as I eventually decided on BEDYED which seemed more in line with the Spenserian use. Chambers gives both so it was a coin toss.

   Loved TWENTYTWENTY. It also raises a question for me, as did 1d, of how to clue hyphenated words in this style of clueing without giving actual letter counts.

2. In the past I remember raising that question of unindicated hyphens and being told that it was conventional for ‘barred’ crosswords not to indicate them, even when they seem essential, as confirmed by Chambers. But The Spectator’s crosswords are barred ones, and hyphens are always indicated. Successive clues in the one I am looking at (4th May issue) indicate (8, two words), and (5, hyphened). There seems no good reason for Azed not to operate in the same way.

   Thanks to Azed, and to Andrew for doing such a careful job despite the usual paucity of comments compared to the number for the weekdays. I’m sure that many others like me regularly look at the blog without feeling the need to add anything, so consistent is the honoured setter.

3. Quenbarrow, Listener puzzles, and many others of that type, use unindicated hyphens. I’ve always found it an unnecessarily annoying obstacle, not least that the Chambers Dictionary word search doesn’t include hyphenated words (e.g. a search for L?E?N won’t show LIE-IN). I can see that hyphens in enumerations of the (3-1-4) variety can be a bit of a giveaway, but I can’t see what would be wrong with (8, hyphenated).

   There have been quite a few comments on Azed in recent weeks but it does seem that we’re back to low single figures. As you say, perhaps solvers don’t  think it necessary to post “Another excellent puzzle from Azed” every week. I hope that’s it, anyway.

    

4. Cruciverbophile – you probably know already, but Chambers Word Wizard will find hyphenated words. (Then again, it won’t find you SOSATIE!)

   Amongst other unfamiliar words, CONGENER was new to me. It just doesn’t sound like an adjective!

   EDITRESS was amusing. Maybe “rag trade” for journalism is an old joke, but it did send me the wrong way.

   Thanks to Azed and Andrew.

    

5. As I’ve said before, the reason I often don’t post about Azed is that after a week I can’t remember much about solving it.

   But, concerning Chambers Word Wizard, I thought too it did give hyphenated words and a quick check shows that L?E?N does gives LIE-IN (and LIE-ON).  As it happened, one thing I did remember from last week was that I needed the Word Wizard to get CONGENER.  This is why I prefer cryptics to quick crosswords.  You can get the word from the wordplay even if you don’t know it.

6. ^  I assumed “Chambers Dictionary word search” wasn’t the same as Chambers Word Wizard.

7. Just my tuppence-‘apeny. I like Azed because it’s a challenge. Not, like some crosswords, time-consuming-only-to-prove-near-impossible-and-boring-when-you-do-get-there crosswords. Others can find those if they wish. I think Azed is my level. I’d say: hard, usually—but fun. There occasionally comes an Azed which is easier, and that is quite right too. We, the solvers, are not an elite and we wish other, probably younger, people to learn, enjoy and continue our tradition.

   But a hyphenated word is, demonstrably, a single word. I don’t need to be told in a clue that it is hyphenated. On the other hand, if you don’t tell me that a phrase is a phrase, I think that would be cheating. I don’t expect to see (4-2-2-4) but I should expect to see (four words).

   My third sentence above includes a ridiculous hyphenated adjectival “word” of a kind recommended by most publishing houses. As long as compilers avoid such ridiculousness, I don’t think I’ll expect of them any indication of hyphenation. I’d not welcome it.

   Stefan

8. Just to confirm, I was referring to the 2003 CD-ROM version of Chambers. It probably belongs in a museum these days, but I still find it very useful –  hyphenation issue apart.

9. OK, I didn’t know such a thing existed.  The Chambers Word Wizard purports to search Chambers, although it will return often proper names that aren’t in the printed dictionary, I think.

   Then again, my 2014 copy of the paper Chambers has literally fallen to pieces.  Anyone know if there’s going to be a new edition ever?

10. Just to make it double figures this week I do agree with cruciverbophile @3 that it is a shame there isn’t more blogged on Azed’s wonders. Congener was a bit awkward, particularly as last month’s PD had rejigged my mind. Incidentally what a wonderful set of winners there were in that comp.

    Anyway thanks to all.

    Incidentally all my references are still paper ones. My first Chambers was the 1952 edition! My future parents-in-law were bewildered when I arrived for a weekend stay with a fat dictionary in my small travelling kit.

    Did anyone see the odd article in the Guardian about an American woman setter whom they extolled, though the example they gave of her work didn’t impress. seemed more like Scrabble.

11. Dear Mr Thomas

    I hitchhiked around Europe when I left school more years ago than I care to reveal. I wasn’t a “backpacker” because I didn’t have a backpack. I had what Australians call a swag. I did have a change of clothes, a towel and so forth but they occupied only slightly more space than my 195? Chambers. I don’t know which edition it was: it’s in a box somewhere—I couldn’t and can’t bring myself to discard what had been a glorious road companion.

    Stefan

12. coming back to this with two belated responses:

    marmite@7, para 2. Point taken. Azed is entitled his policy of not indicating hyphens – it’s his crossword. Just as the New York Times is entitled to not even indicate when an answer consists of two or more distinct words. Part of the fun is adjusting to the different conventions.

    In which connection, Keith thomas @10, last para, commenting on that weird article on the young NYT setter. I’ll take the liberty of pasting in my response to a similar comment on the site on Monday:

    Yes, that article was ridiculous in presenting Ms Shechtman – in a British paper – as a ‘star of the crossword world’, rather than a star of the non-cryptic American crossword world. I assumed this must be a reprint from a US paper, carelessly waved through without an appropriate editorial introduction, but evidently the journalist actually works for the Guardian/Observer! But he does call himself a ‘clueless crossword amateur’… yes indeed. However, the puzzle printed does have the kind of ingenious embedded theme (the three feminists) that is typical of the attractions of the NYT under Will Shortz. For those who don’t have it already, I recommend the 2013 book ‘The Centenary of the Crossword’ by John Halpern (Paul), which is very good and scholarly on the US/UK compare-contrast topic.

     

13. Regarding hyphenated solutions, the following is a modified version of a comment I posted against the blog for 2,402:

    The standard practice in UK barred cryptics (Azed, Mephisto, EV, Listener, Magpie etc – though the Spectator does buck the trend) is that compound words are treated as single words, with the overall letter count shown, while phrases are given the additional qualification ‘n words’. This contrasts with blocked cryptics, where (a-b[-c…]) and (a,b[,c…]) are usual, so UPRIGHT-MAN would be (7-3) rather than (10) while UPRIGHT PIANO would be (7,5) rather than (12, two words). This makes things a little more difficult for the solver of barred puzzles, but that is to an extent offset by the smaller number of unchecked letters in entries (never more than a third in Azed, although other barred puzzles do allow three unches in eight-letter words).

    The Guidance Notes for Listener setters say:

    “Single words and hyphenated words should be indicated simply by the number of letters. Where answers are of two or more words, this should be indicated after the total number of letters. For example, CUL-DE-SAC would be (8); SELL-BY DATE would be (10, two words). The Chambers Dictionary is the authority where dictionaries conflict over word division.”

    Azed has made comments on the topic of hyphenated words on several occasions, most recently I believe in the slip for AZ 1,203, where he observed:

    “Some of you queried my non-indication of hyphenated words as such, e.g. by calling OTHER-DIRECTED a 13-letter word, not ‘(5-8)’. This has always been my practice, following Ximenean precedent, and on balance I don’t see the need to change.”

    With a solution like TIMESERVER, Azed will always indicate the form given by Chambers (Chambers shows it only as a single word); where Chambers lists multiple options, eg NO-ONE or NO ONE, Azed will typically show the pattern of the ‘more integrated’ (ie less helpful to the solver) form (here NO-ONE, 5 letters).

14. A bit late, but coincidental. 1 Across in the cryptic in the Melbourne Age newspaper for 17 May 2019:

    1 Ac: Like telegrams to be properly constructed or I can’t make head or tail of it (2’1,3,5,2,2)

    Just forgive us. We even need indications of apostrophes now.

    Stefan

     

Comments are closed.