5 ms·

This is entirely about crossword puzzle clues, by the way. (And demonstrates why I don't enjoy crosswords. Perhaps I'm not awake enough yet, but the explanatio

This is entirely about crossword puzzle clues, by the way. (And demonstrates why I don't enjoy crosswords. Perhaps I'm not awake enough yet, but the explanation of the answer to "I say nothing (3)" is one of those that is so much of a stretch that I would reject it if I thought of it. "o" means "nothing"??)

TheIronYuppie 3y ago
These are cryptics, not crosswords. The idea is that most clues have two parts, a literal "I" and a figurative "say == 'e.g.', nothing == 'o'". Cryptics are a language unto themselves - they're not for everyone! But i love them so much.
- jameshart 3y ago
  Weird piece of pedantry. Most commonly cryptic clues are used as clues to crosswords, right?
  - mkehrt 3y ago
    Not really; they're an entirely different type of clue than traditional crosswords. As the poster above found out, if you go in expecting crossword clues, you're going to be confused and disappointed. The comment you're replying to is making this distinction to explain this to them.
    - jameshart 3y ago
      In the UK the distinction is not really made. All the main broadsheet newspaper crosswords are set with cryptic clues (often with an alternative solve for the grid based on a separate set of ‘quick clues’).
      - mkehrt 3y ago
        Huh, interesting. Yeah, in the US cryptic clues are almost unheard of and considered very hard.
        jameshart 3y ago
        Stephen Sondheim tried to educate y’all in 1968. https://nymag.com/article/2019/03/stephen-sondheim-on-how-to-do-a-crossword-puzzle.html https://nymag.com/article/2019/03/stephen-sondheim-on-how-to...
        mkehrt 3y ago
        Ah, yeah, I've seen this. (I've been slowly learning cryptic clues myself this past year.)
      - DonaldFisk 3y ago
        Usually the quick crosswords are separate (different grid and answers) from the cryptics. The Grauniad also has quiptic crosswords, which are cryptic but usually easier than regular cryptics, and the Glasgow Herald has the Wee Stinker, which was smaller and harder than cryptics.
- digging 3y ago
  That makes sense on a re-reading. I've never heard of cryptics so the title was, well, cryptic to me. I still think "nothing -> o" is ridiculous though. Is it an allusion to some other work or jargon? Or that it looks similar to a "0"?
  - DonaldFisk 3y ago
    > Or that it looks similar to a "0"? Yes, that's why. It's a tradition in cryptic crosswords. Similarly, duck (from cricket) and love (from tennis) can also be used for letter O. It's one of the things you pick up when you start doing cryptics, along with other things like doctor (used as a verb), criminal, and nuts (meaning crazy) suggesting an anagram. If you think things like that are ridiculous, perhaps cryptic crosswords are not for you.
gs17 3y ago
There are a lot of patterns you have to recognize to get answers in cryptics and if you try to solve them without knowing how the clues work it's just nonsense. Especially if you assume they work at all like a normal crossword. I don't enjoy them, but I get it. The article mentions "Spooner" in a clue being a dead giveaway there's a Spoonerism, but there's a lot of similar things to look for. There's usually a hint that there's an anagram, put one word inside another, combine two words and find a new word inside them, etc. The clue almost always has a synonym for the answer as part of it, so the "I = say + nothing" actually is how it's intended to be read, e.g. "saw = dog wearing lead".
- geoelectric 3y ago
  There's a really good cryptic crossword trainer on mobile ( https://www.learncrypticcrosswords.com/ https://www.learncrypticcrosswords.com/ ) that teaches you how to recognize these sorts of hint words and parse the clues. It costs a few bucks to unlock all the lessons, but I started enjoying cryptics a lot more with that basic grounding. Turns out it's actually a very structured activity, for all the apparent chaos.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

TheIronYuppie 3y ago

These are cryptics, not crosswords. The idea is that most clues have two parts, a literal "I" and a figurative "say == 'e.g.', nothing == 'o'". Cryptics are a language unto themselves - they're not for everyone! But i love them so much.

jameshart 3y ago
Weird piece of pedantry. Most commonly cryptic clues are used as clues to crosswords, right?
- mkehrt 3y ago
  Not really; they're an entirely different type of clue than traditional crosswords. As the poster above found out, if you go in expecting crossword clues, you're going to be confused and disappointed. The comment you're replying to is making this distinction to explain this to them.
  - jameshart 3y ago
    In the UK the distinction is not really made. All the main broadsheet newspaper crosswords are set with cryptic clues (often with an alternative solve for the grid based on a separate set of ‘quick clues’).
    - mkehrt 3y ago
      Huh, interesting. Yeah, in the US cryptic clues are almost unheard of and considered very hard.
      - jameshart 3y ago
        Stephen Sondheim tried to educate y’all in 1968. https://nymag.com/article/2019/03/stephen-sondheim-on-how-to-do-a-crossword-puzzle.html https://nymag.com/article/2019/03/stephen-sondheim-on-how-to...
        mkehrt 3y ago
        Ah, yeah, I've seen this. (I've been slowly learning cryptic clues myself this past year.)
    - DonaldFisk 3y ago
      Usually the quick crosswords are separate (different grid and answers) from the cryptics. The Grauniad also has quiptic crosswords, which are cryptic but usually easier than regular cryptics, and the Glasgow Herald has the Wee Stinker, which was smaller and harder than cryptics.
digging 3y ago
That makes sense on a re-reading. I've never heard of cryptics so the title was, well, cryptic to me. I still think "nothing -> o" is ridiculous though. Is it an allusion to some other work or jargon? Or that it looks similar to a "0"?
- DonaldFisk 3y ago
  > Or that it looks similar to a "0"? Yes, that's why. It's a tradition in cryptic crosswords. Similarly, duck (from cricket) and love (from tennis) can also be used for letter O. It's one of the things you pick up when you start doing cryptics, along with other things like doctor (used as a verb), criminal, and nuts (meaning crazy) suggesting an anagram. If you think things like that are ridiculous, perhaps cryptic crosswords are not for you.

gs17 3y ago

There are a lot of patterns you have to recognize to get answers in cryptics and if you try to solve them without knowing how the clues work it's just nonsense. Especially if you assume they work at all like a normal crossword. I don't enjoy them, but I get it. The article mentions "Spooner" in a clue being a dead giveaway there's a Spoonerism, but there's a lot of similar things to look for. There's usually a hint that there's an anagram, put one word inside another, combine two words and find a new word inside them, etc. The clue almost always has a synonym for the answer as part of it, so the "I = say + nothing" actually is how it's intended to be read, e.g. "saw = dog wearing lead".

geoelectric 3y ago
There's a really good cryptic crossword trainer on mobile ( https://www.learncrypticcrosswords.com/ https://www.learncrypticcrosswords.com/ ) that teaches you how to recognize these sorts of hint words and parse the clues. It costs a few bucks to unlock all the lessons, but I started enjoying cryptics a lot more with that basic grounding. Turns out it's actually a very structured activity, for all the apparent chaos.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]