| Author |
Message |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 2:34 am: |       |
By Fred Z (Dref) on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 01:51 am:
Was the antennae dripped in champagne? to clarify: "antenna" is a singular noun of which the plural is "antennae"  But neither of the two antennae involved was dipped in champagne. |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 1:37 pm: | |
Do the two antennae provide reception for the same electronic device? to two electronic devices of the same type? to two identical electronic devices? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 1:41 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 01:37 pm:
Do the two antennae provide reception for the same electronic device? to two electronic devices of the same type? to two identical electronic devices? this is not recorded, and does not matter. All that is relevant is that here are a pair of celebrating antennae... |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 3:50 pm: | |
Is this a "joke"? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 4:04 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 03:50 pm:
Is this a "joke"? as opposed to a serious Friday-afternoon-only puzzle about two antennae celebrating by drinking champagne? Er... yes |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 4:19 pm: | |
So do we know anything more about the situation at hand than that there are two antennae celebrating by drinking champagne? Would you be so kind as to explain what we need to work out from here?
Is this joke based on a pun? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 4:21 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 04:19 pm:
So do we know anything more about the situation at hand than that there are two antennae celebrating by drinking champagne? it would help to discover what it is that they are celebrating... Would you be so kind as to explain what we need to work out from here? ...and once you have done this, the rest will follow as the night the day
Is this joke based on a pun? yes |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 5:05 pm: | |
If I remember correctly, they are celebrating something that they have accomplished? Is this accomplishment something that antennae usually do? or something that only anthropomorphic antennae do? Are there any other personified objects relevant to this puzzle? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 5:10 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 05:05 pm:
If I remember correctly, they are celebrating something that they have accomplished? yes, for svv of "accomplished" Is this accomplishment something that antennae usually do? no or something that only anthropomorphic antennae do? yes Are there any other personified objects relevant to this puzzle? no |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 5:14 pm: | |
Was the type of occasion they were celebrating something that humans also celebrate? by drinking champagne?
Are the genders of the antennae relevant? anything about the relationship between them? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 5:26 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 05:14 pm:
Was the type of occasion they were celebrating something that humans also celebrate? yes by drinking champagne? more often than not, yes - champagne is traditionally associated with an event of this kind
Are the genders of the antennae relevant? yes anything about the relationship between them? most certainly |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 6:14 pm: | |
Are they a boy antenna and a girl antenna? Have they just gotten married? |
Fred Z (Dref)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 7:52 pm: | |
Were there "electricity" between the two? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:11 am: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 06:14 pm:
Are they a boy antenna and a girl antenna? well, their ages are not recorded, but.. Have they just gotten married? yes, indeed
By Fred Z (Dref) on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 07:52 pm:
Were there "electricity" between the two? perhaps, but that is not really the point |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 9:11 am: | |
Are there any potential baby antennae relevant to this joke? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:05 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 09:11 am:
Are there any potential baby antennae relevant to this joke? no |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:09 pm: | |
Is there anything else we need to discover about the situation at hand? Or do we now need to work out some sort of pun about two antennae getting married and celebrating by drinking champagne? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:15 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 01:09 pm:
Is there anything else we need to discover about the situation at hand? no Or do we now need to work out some sort of pun about two antennae getting married and celebrating by drinking champagne? yes. Champagne itself is not relevant - the joke would work as well if I had said "It must have been the food", or "It must have been the music", or... |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:17 pm: | |
Is the idea that the only reason these antennae got married was so that they could drink champagne? (or eat food, or listen to music?) |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:21 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 01:17 pm:
Is the idea that the only reason these antennae got married was so that they could drink champagne? (or eat food, or listen to music?) no |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:29 pm: | |
I guess I am confused as to what "it" is in "It must have been the champagne." Should I be? To me, such a statement usually means something like "It must have been the champagne that made them do (something)." Is this the correct interpretation? Should we figure out what this (something) is? (Or who "them" is, if not the newly wed antennae?) Or is there actually nothing more to be gleaned from the puzzle statement, and we really just have to come up with a pun about two antennae getting married? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:39 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 01:29 pm:
I guess I am confused as to what "it" is in "It must have been the champagne." Should I be? I don't think you are all that confused, but I will try to help To me, such a statement usually means something like "It must have been the champagne that made them do (something)." Is this the correct interpretation? not quite. The statement can also mean something like "It must have been the champagne that made the celebration such a success". Should we figure out what this (something) is? no (Or who "them" is, if not the newly wed antennae?) "they" could be other antennae, or other pieces of electrical equipment, or people, or goats, or anthropomophized rhododendrons, or... Or is there actually nothing more to be gleaned from the puzzle statement, and we really just have to come up with a pun about two antennae getting married? not "getting married" as such, but... |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 1:52 pm: | |
So was this the wedding reception? Or the honeymoon? Was there any dancing? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 2:01 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 01:52 pm:
So was this the wedding reception? this one, and that... well, I will leave you to finish it, since you have worked so hard Or the honeymoon? Was there any dancing? in a woubit puzzle? |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 2:05 pm: | |
And so because they were antennae, it was a very good reception? Or is there more to it than that? |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 2:09 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 02:05 pm:
And so because they were antennae, it was a very good reception? Or is there more to it than that? no, that will do It has taken a few more Friday afternoons than it might have done, but...
***** SPOILER *****
A couple of television aerials were married the other day. The service wasn't much, but the reception was brilliant.
Must have been the champagne. Well done Buzzard, and Dref, and everyone. |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 2:11 pm: | |
Did you make this up yourself? |
Johanna (Buzzard)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 2:12 pm: | |
You really ought to thank Tessa, too. If she hadn't come up with the antennae idea, I don't know where we'd be. |
David Burn (Woubit)
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 2:21 pm: | |
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 02:11 pm:
Did you make this up yourself? I don't think so. But this puzzle was set so long ago that I can't remember its origins
By Johanna (Buzzard) on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 02:12 pm:
You really ought to thank Tessa, too. If she hadn't come up with the antennae idea, I don't know where we'd be. then thank you, Tessa |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page