The Stickler Weekly 33 Solution

As a setter, I make it my business to keep track of what’s happening in the world of crosswords. This means visiting other setters’ websites, solving various crosswords and reading crossword blogs. We don’t host many of these in Australia, but occasionally something turns up that catches my attention. This week a short discussion erupted on the DATrippers website about a clue, from the Sun-Herald (11/5/2014), reportedly written by Russel Jessop, son of the great Noel Jessop. It caught my eye as it relates directly to a recent request from a solver to explain further the “no definition/wordplay etymology crossover” rule mentioned in my Crossword Unclued interview. The clue mentioned on DATrippers was: Perform and measure performance (5) Answer: EN+ACT. One DATrippers poster pointed out the lack of disguise in the clue and noted the obvious relationship between “perform” and “performance”, a construction that must have been intentional on the part of the setter. This clue would obviously contravene the etymology rule, as the “act” in both sides of the clue stems from the same etymological source. Note that it’s using “act” on both sides of the equation that causes the problem, not necessarily how “act” is defined or clued. That is, Perform and measure turn (5) would still be unacceptable, however, I would see this as a vastly superior clue to the abovementioned one as some disguise is present.
The “no definition/wordplay etymology crossover” rule effectively means that no part of the answer can have an etymological relationship with the wordplay. It’s tough and restricts the setter both in choice of answers and clueing options, which is why, perhaps, setters in the UK and Oz don’t abide by it. Generally, disguise is all that matters, so as long as the related parts appear different, that’s enough. Personally I like the challenge and try to write my clues with the rule in mind.