(Q - Argonaut: Precisely on the meaning of words and the meaning that can be given to them, when you say that there is no play on words in hunting, exactly that for me
bothers me a little because I don't know how to take this sentence? What limits do you put between the play on words and the fact that we can take a different meaning of a word, a sentence or something?
an expression, whether on the spiral, or on something else?)
MB: You will have to give me an example, and to be very clear, I only base this on one thing, and that is the text of the solutions. In the text of the solutions, I did not find any puns.
(Q - Argonaut: Okay, it can typically be, we were talking about the spiral, to take another meaning that a mathematician can have on it, it can be on a line for example, on Apollo's arrow, on expressions of this type, or even on an expression that we would have at the end of the game. I have difficulty seeing the difference between a play on words and the fact of taking a different meaning from what we read.)
MB: For example, give me an example of a play on words that you consider to be a play on words.
(Q - Argonaut: Concretely, talking about a review that would not be one, for example. Talking about a trait that falls, but which is not a trait that we trace, for example. To speak of a spiral with four centers which in fact is a play on words to represent something other than a real spiral, so a form of spiral. Those are things that I could take. like things…)
MB: No, but there isn't all that. A spiral is a spiral. A line that falls, I have done a lot of drawings, my features never fall. The only line that falls is an arrow, so it is indeed the idea of ??an arrow. There you go, it's pictorial, it's poetic, it's everything we want, but it's not a play on words. A play on words, you have to ask Isidore, that’s all he does. He makes the language of birds, we play on words, double meaning.
(Q - Pixy: Is homophony a play on words for you or not? Do I, for example, take the example of the city of Troyes which could be represented by the 3, the number?)
MB: But there's not that in hunting. There are no puns in the hunt. It's not the atmosphere at all. And that wasn't at all the atmosphere the game was made in at the time it was made, again. Hence the interest in rethinking all that, to put into perspective the cold case part, in quotes, of the game. It was not designed like that. All of this is developments that come from minitel exchanges, exchanges between owls, etc. This is all the construction that followed. But you have to base yourself on the origin of the game, the specifications. Everything is simple.
(Q - Mupsaï: Hello Michel, I wanted to intervene just on what you have just said, I am obliged to say that it is not true in fact, since the 470 and the charades are precisely only linked to puns When we are told “my 7th is just a knot” and the charade answer is “E”, it is necessarily a homophony and it is part of the hunt, even if. it was found, but it's part of the hunt and it's an integral element to this charade which is a homophony which allows us to put "knot" is equal to "e" and it's a... Isidore would say that it's is bird language, but whatever we call bird language, it is in my opinion more complex than that bird language, but that doesn't matter. But the notion of the equal "knot". “e” is clearly in the hunt, in the riddle of a charade for example.)
MB: Yes, but that is adopted by everyone Mupsaï, I know, I said it earlier, I said outside of the resolutions that we know today. What's happening today? What happens is that I see wordings of solutions which are sometimes terrifyingly complex and which call upon homophonies, lots of discoveries, etc. And I say, there isn't that.
(Q - Mupsaï: We should not add any more. What is in the hunt is enough. There are no additional elements. I simply wanted to point out the fact that there actually are in the game.)
MB: You did well, that’s perfectly correct. Leaving the resolution of the texts as it has been established for quite some time, beyond that, there is no point in going any further. You have to know when to stop.
(Q - ??: Even for the last two puzzles?)
MB: So, what is your idea about the last two puzzles?
(Q - ??: No, no, here we are going to say the question that arose: we should not go out on texts, riddles and everything. Is that also applicable for the last two puzzles? Should we stay within the framework of the hunt? Without too much…)
MB: Without getting too crazy, yeah.
MB: You will have to give me an example, and to be very clear, I only base this on one thing, and that is the text of the solutions. In the text of the solutions, I did not find any puns.
(Q - Argonaut: Okay, it can typically be, we were talking about the spiral, to take another meaning that a mathematician can have on it, it can be on a line for example, on Apollo's arrow, on expressions of this type, or even on an expression that we would have at the end of the game. I have difficulty seeing the difference between a play on words and the fact of taking a different meaning from what we read.)
MB: For example, give me an example of a play on words that you consider to be a play on words.
(Q - Argonaut: Concretely, talking about a review that would not be one, for example. Talking about a trait that falls, but which is not a trait that we trace, for example. To speak of a spiral with four centers which in fact is a play on words to represent something other than a real spiral, so a form of spiral. Those are things that I could take. like things…)
MB: No, but there isn't all that. A spiral is a spiral. A line that falls, I have done a lot of drawings, my features never fall. The only line that falls is an arrow, so it is indeed the idea of ??an arrow. There you go, it's pictorial, it's poetic, it's everything we want, but it's not a play on words. A play on words, you have to ask Isidore, that’s all he does. He makes the language of birds, we play on words, double meaning.
(Q - Pixy: Is homophony a play on words for you or not? Do I, for example, take the example of the city of Troyes which could be represented by the 3, the number?)
MB: But there's not that in hunting. There are no puns in the hunt. It's not the atmosphere at all. And that wasn't at all the atmosphere the game was made in at the time it was made, again. Hence the interest in rethinking all that, to put into perspective the cold case part, in quotes, of the game. It was not designed like that. All of this is developments that come from minitel exchanges, exchanges between owls, etc. This is all the construction that followed. But you have to base yourself on the origin of the game, the specifications. Everything is simple.
(Q - Mupsaï: Hello Michel, I wanted to intervene just on what you have just said, I am obliged to say that it is not true in fact, since the 470 and the charades are precisely only linked to puns When we are told “my 7th is just a knot” and the charade answer is “E”, it is necessarily a homophony and it is part of the hunt, even if. it was found, but it's part of the hunt and it's an integral element to this charade which is a homophony which allows us to put "knot" is equal to "e" and it's a... Isidore would say that it's is bird language, but whatever we call bird language, it is in my opinion more complex than that bird language, but that doesn't matter. But the notion of the equal "knot". “e” is clearly in the hunt, in the riddle of a charade for example.)
MB: Yes, but that is adopted by everyone Mupsaï, I know, I said it earlier, I said outside of the resolutions that we know today. What's happening today? What happens is that I see wordings of solutions which are sometimes terrifyingly complex and which call upon homophonies, lots of discoveries, etc. And I say, there isn't that.
(Q - Mupsaï: We should not add any more. What is in the hunt is enough. There are no additional elements. I simply wanted to point out the fact that there actually are in the game.)
MB: You did well, that’s perfectly correct. Leaving the resolution of the texts as it has been established for quite some time, beyond that, there is no point in going any further. You have to know when to stop.
(Q - ??: Even for the last two puzzles?)
MB: So, what is your idea about the last two puzzles?
(Q - ??: No, no, here we are going to say the question that arose: we should not go out on texts, riddles and everything. Is that also applicable for the last two puzzles? Should we stay within the framework of the hunt? Without too much…)
MB: Without getting too crazy, yeah.