Correct. Your turn.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Cryptic clues = station name
- Thread starter paulravuslante
- Start date
Correct. Your turn.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Karl
On Moderation
CSR Chassen Road?
not this
OK, this one is not getting any traction [pun intended], so I'll release it into the wild :cry:.
Leaders of (a pointer to the first letters) corporate social responsibility = csr
provide alternative (suggests changing the word provide) = donate
integration (a hint to an anagram) = csr + donate
= doncaster
open floor..
DaleCooper
Established Member
Another clue would have been welcome; there are a lot of synonyms for provide.
Maybe so, but I wont be online for a few days, so didn't want it stagnating the thread.
Seacook
Member
Indirect anagrams are considered by many to be unfair in cryptic clues. I am among that number. They have their place when used sparingly but in crosswords you will have some letters in place from other clues and will know the length of the answer; and, as Dale Cooper implied, there ought not to be too many synonyms.
If you can find a copy, Ximenes on the Art of the Crossword (1966) by D S Macnutt is a seminal work on clue writing that came down firmly against indirect anagrams. Teach Yourself Crosswords (1975) by Alec Robins is very good, much easier to get hold of, and is based on Macnutt's work.
DaleCooper
Established Member
Craven Arms?
Not Craven Arms. I should clarify my reference: we're thinking a former main-line junction, which used to be junction for just two branches; but both branches now abandoned.
DaleCooper
Established Member
Four Lane Ends?
Nope. Hint -- the name is also that of a prominent "dynasty" in the acting profession, a couple of centuries back.
Last edited:
Seacook
Member
Kemble?
Correct (run-on word -- "lack emblem"). Over to you.
Seacook
Member
Open floor
DaleCooper
Established Member
Worksop?? (back to normal work and operations)
DaleCooper
Established Member
No, it's not Worksop.
Seems to me that these published critics must of struggled with this cryptic style despite being very prevalent. This style can still can be found today in the Guardian Cryptic Crosswords.
The whole point of a cryptic clue is to have difficult clues which indicate the solutions indirectly [however indirectly]. No-one really wants a clue to be solved within 5 minutes of posting, do they?
I do though acknowledge posting an obscure synonym reference, which did not help matters
Last edited:
Darnall?
DaleCooper
Established Member
Correct, your turn...
He is removed from a lizard?
Seacook
Member
Seems to me that these published critics must of struggled with this cryptic style despite being very prevalent. This style can still can be found today in the Guardian Cryptic Crosswords.
The whole point of a cryptic clue is to have difficult clues which indicate the solutions indirectly [however indirectly]. No-one really wants a clue to be solved within 5 minutes of posting, do they?
I do though acknowledge posting an obscure synonym reference, which did not help matters
Clues can be difficult while not being unfair. The two are not incompatible. Once an answer is revealed, the reaction should be "oh, I never thought of that," not "that clue cannot be read so as to point to that answer."
Unusual clue types do exist but they have explanatory text to indicate the approach; examples can include printer's devilry clues where the answer has to be inserted into the clue to form a new sentence.
In cryptic crosswords other information is available - the length of the words in the clue, and any crossing letters. This is not the case here although the restriction in subject matter to stations means that a definition of the answer is not required.
No one really wants awkward inelegant clues do they?
Camelon?
Indeed
Thanks. I flatter myself that this is a bit of a fiendish one; but the geniuses here, may prove otherwise.
Overall-best-for-most creed espoused here?
Hint: take a look through your list of 18th / 19th Century thinkers.
DaleCooper
Established Member
Bentham?