wu :: forums
        (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        riddles >> what happened >> woman in locked car
        
(Message started by: R. on Feb 10th, 2004, 11:36am)
Title: woman in locked car
Post by R. on Feb 10th, 2004, 11:36am
A man an woman in the country leave for town in their car.  On a country road, it breaks down. The man doen't like the idea of leaving his wife, but he has no choice and tells her to lock the doors and not to let anyone in.  When he returns he finds his wife entertaining two strangers in the car.  The doors are locked, the windows up, and they haven't been opened since he left. What happend?
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by Cathos on Feb 10th, 2004, 12:05pm
Were they going to [hide] the hospital in town so she could deliver twins [/hide]
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 10th, 2004, 1:07pm
I don't know if I would call them strangers in that case..
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by R. on Feb 10th, 2004, 1:38pm
I would.
If he never met them before, they would be strangers.

R.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 10th, 2004, 1:56pm
I don't think 'not having met' is a good criterium for 'stranger'.
::[hide]The wife has lived with them for months for one. By association alone they wouldn't be strangers in my regard..

I don't even consider friends of friends strangers if I meet them under circumstances where they are clearly associated with my friends. As long as I can immediately classify them with any certainty in some in a relational network they're not strangers (which are those who fall outside my social network)

Actually, I don't think I would call babies strangers under any circumstance.. No more than I would call pets or wild animals strangers..[/hide]::
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by R. on Feb 10th, 2004, 4:12pm
strang·er
n.

  1. One who is neither a friend nor an acquaintance.
  2. A foreigner, newcomer, or outsider.
  3. One who is unaccustomed to or unacquainted with something specified; a novice: a stranger to our language; no stranger to hardship.
  4. A visitor or guest.
  5. Law. One that is neither privy nor party to a title, act, or contract.


Or we can make up new definitions for any word we like.  If so the ans to every riddle in this forum is "Batavia"   ;D
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by KenYonRuKu on Feb 10th, 2004, 7:02pm
I agree with Towr's sentiments, but he was the one who first introduced the word "stranger", not R. "Not having met" is indeed not a good criterium for "stranger", but as "stranger" does not appear in the wording of the original riddle, it is irrelevant.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by Cathos on Feb 10th, 2004, 7:09pm
Whoa... I think it actually was in the wording, it was just edited to be more accurate.  Anyways, as was already said, the correct answer is Batavia
;)
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by KenYonRuKu on Feb 10th, 2004, 7:18pm
In that case, my apologies. If I seem a little coarse, I can only cite my tiredness as an excuse. I must stop burning the candle in the middle, as well as at both ends...  ::)
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by Cathos on Feb 10th, 2004, 8:51pm
hehe, I didn't mean "whoa, you're overreacting!"  I meant "whoa, I thought that it did say stranger, but now it doesn't!"
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 11th, 2004, 12:18am

on 02/10/04 at 16:12:58, R. wrote:
Or we can make up new definitions for any word we like.
As the wording has been improved it's a bit of a moot point, but the 'definition' you dug up isn't the only one out there. Different dictionaries give different 'definitions'.. (Actually, dictionaries don't give definitions, they only describe the language)

just two examples from http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=stranger

\Stran"ger\, n. [OF. estrangier, F. ['e]tranger. See Strange.] 2. One not belonging to the family or household; a guest; a visitor.
clearly here they do belong to the family

stranger
n : anyone who does not belong in the environment in which they are found [syn: alien, unknown]
I would say they were expected and thus not out of place

As a final note, I would like to voice my opinion that words are defined by the people that use them, not by dictionaries. Their meaning may also change over time. So inevitably different meanings of the same word will clash and it helps to voice your opinion on the matter so everyone still knows what the other is talking about. (Which imo is the function of language) Dictionaries are only an aid in this (and only reflect the current popular opinion(s) of what a word means)
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by R. on Feb 11th, 2004, 6:44am
Well I think that your logic is Batavia.

R.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by John_Gaughan on Feb 11th, 2004, 8:18am
This is going in a different direction...

What if the two people were locked in the trunk. The wife put the back seat down to let them into the main part of the car without opening doors or windows.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 11th, 2004, 8:47am

on 02/11/04 at 06:44:26, R. wrote:
Well I think that your logic is Batavia.
If the meaning you endow to batavia in this context is equivalent to either brilliant or impeckable in common english (or otherwise positive), I couldn't agree more :P
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by R. on Feb 11th, 2004, 8:53am

on 02/11/04 at 08:47:05, towr wrote:
If the meaning you endow to batavia in this context is equivalent to either brilliant or impeckable in common english (or otherwise positive), I couldn't agree more :P


"That depends on what the definition of the word 'is' is"
-- The greatest liar of our time
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 11th, 2004, 9:24am
I think you're giving Bill too much credit, there were much greater liars in our time, many so great they've never been exposed as such.. (And in his defense, 'is' can mean different things, crucially different in a sensitive context. Any good dictionary will give at least 10 slightly differing meanings)
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by KenYonRuKu on Feb 11th, 2004, 10:17am
Perhaps this isn't the place to raise such a question, but here goes... despite his truth economising, wouldn't you rather have Bill in charge right now instead of Dubya?...
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 11th, 2004, 11:07am

on 02/11/04 at 10:17:41, KenYonRuKu wrote:
truth economising
what a great euphemism.. must remember that one..


Quote:
wouldn't you rather have Bill in charge right now instead of Dubya?...
Right now, I don't think it would matter much; reelections are coming up so Bush will be out soon enough. At least he didn't blow up the planet, though I was worried a bit at times.. I'm not sure Bill would have been a great alternative, all the attention to his personal life/problems were interfering with his work imo..
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by John_Gaughan on Feb 11th, 2004, 11:22am

on 02/11/04 at 11:07:57, towr wrote:
I'm not sure Bill would have been a great alternative, all the attention to his personal life/problems were interfering with his work imo..

I think U.S. government is at its best when different parties control different branches. For example, Bill, a moderate democrat, had the executive: republicans had congress, but even then, the margin wasn't substantial. In the end, very few bad bills became law, because one party could not push its agenda through. I do not want to start a political flamewar over this, I support neither party, I just feel that balance and moderation is key.

I am not a democrat, but they have my vote for president this election. They could nominate a pet rock and I would vote for it at this point.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by Cathos on Feb 11th, 2004, 12:17pm
I'm not a fan of Dubya, but at this point, I don't really see how he could loose the election.  I just don't think the democrats have enough charisma or influence to win, and a lot of people will just vote democrat or republican because that's how they were raised, despite the issues (and a lot of people don't even know about/understand most of the issues)  I doubt Bill would be a better choice, because of all the controversy, but perhaps Gore would have been, it's hard to say.  I think he would have been less, uh... 'gung-ho' than Bush, and let's face it, America has lost a lot of popularity throughout the world because of this.  I just wish some of the independants and other parties could have a sporting chance and winning.  Not that they would be better, but the chance of an independant winning the presidency would be slim at best.  Personally I think there's far too much politics involved in politics.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by Speaker on Feb 11th, 2004, 8:10pm
What does batavia mean?  ???
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 12th, 2004, 1:04am
Batavia used to be a Dutch colony in Indonesia. It also was the name of a Dutch trading vessel that sailed there. The name comes from a tribe that lived in the Netherlands and (before that in Germany) around the time of the Roman occupation of Europe. And during the golden age for the Netherlands they were popular as a sort of symbol of freedom as they had risen up against the romans at at least one occasion (of course they got crushed, but it's easy to disregard that). The reason for this is that we in the netherlands had also just risen up against our oppressor, Spain, but we won. So it was part of our 'tradition of freedom'.

I suppose Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org) may have more to say about it if you really want to know..
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by R. on Feb 12th, 2004, 6:25am

on 02/11/04 at 20:10:27, Speaker wrote:
What does batavia mean?  ???


I have recently been educated to the fact that a word is defined by the person using it  ;) , so it can mean anything. For instance, it could mean batavia.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 12th, 2004, 7:18am

on 02/12/04 at 06:25:14, R. wrote:
I have recently been educated to the fact that a word is defined by the person using it  ;) , so it can mean anything. For instance, it could mean batavia.
You must have be listening to someone other than me then, as I clearly said 'people', not 'person'. ::) Of course when you're talking to yourself the difference doesn't matter, as you probably know what you mean. But if you're talking to someone else, words form the common currency to trade thoughts. They need only mean the same thing to the people communicating for them to have a sensible conversation.
Encryption works on that principle. It seems nonsensicle to anyone who doesn't know the right code; just as french sounds non-sensicle to me, but not to people that understand what the words mean (and some of the grammar as well naturally).
And as I said, over time the meaning of words shift and change, and new words are formed. f.i. 'drugs' used to simply mean something like 'dry substance', these days most people understand it to be either medicine or addictive substances (these classes overlap in some cases). Words change, and dictionaries change with them, that's why people can still make a good living from them; they're allways out of date so people need revised, updated versions.

Inevitably to people will find they have a different understanding of word, say 'stranger'. This makes it necessary to explicate what you mean to enable you to have a sensible conversation about it. Pulling out a dictionary can help, but as I've shown, other dictionaries may describe the word differently, and even outright conflict with other dictionaries.
What it comes down to, is that the original wording didn't make sense to me (and others with the same understanding of the word 'stranger' as me) in relation to the answer. And the obvious way to fix that was to adjust the wording to something we can all find ourself in.. Which is usually a good strategy were misunderstandings are concerned..
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by R. on Feb 12th, 2004, 8:17am
Allright this is the last I'm going to say on the matter.

The word "stranger" was correctly used, since it can, to nearly everyone, mean someone you have never met before. Therefore the story did not use unfair trickery, which seems to be a common complaint for thoes who can't state the ans to a riddle within 5 minutes of it being posted.  Trickery would have been to say "entertaining 2 cowboys", where "cowboys" is defined by the person telling the story as "a human being that you have never met physically".

I will remind everyone of the original statement which inclued this statement:


Quote:
As a final note, I would like to voice my opinion that words are defined by the people that use them, not by dictionaries.


Which is not true in a micro sense, but I'll agree its true on a macro scale. MEANING, that its not true when dealing with an individual conversation, but is true when dealing with the history of converstations, where new meanings permeate (spread), among the speakers of the language. For instance, that stupid f*&^ing phrase "bling-bling".


It goes on to say....


Quote:
So inevitably different meanings of the same word will clash and it helps to voice your opinion on the matter so everyone still knows what the other is talking about. (Which imo is the function of language)


True, but aren't riddles riddles because of the different meanings? Isn't part of figuring one out the ability to see the different meanings?  If riddles were written to clearly explain the meaning of each word then they in most cases they wouldn't be riddles would they.

Anyway, I'm changing the story back to the original.
I'll agree to disagree, if we can just drop it.

:P
R.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by towr on Feb 12th, 2004, 9:37am

on 02/12/04 at 08:17:59, R. wrote:
The word "stranger" was correctly used, since it can, to nearly everyone, mean someone you have never met before. Therefore the story did not use unfair trickery
I still dispute 'nearly everyone' would find 'stranger' properly used in this case. (I'm half tempted to put it upto a vote :P )
But I wouldn't call it unfair trickery either, as I believe you honestly thought everyone would understand (eventually).


Quote:
True, but aren't riddles riddles because of the different meanings?
That depends on the riddle, in this case the meaning should be clear, as the riddle is how the newcomers got there and it's not a play on words.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by R. on Feb 12th, 2004, 9:42am
Then we disagree, because I believe the crux of the riddle is the play on the word stranger.

I'm glad thats over with. :)  

R.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by Icarus on Feb 12th, 2004, 4:03pm
Wouldn't it be better to change the puzzle to say "entertaining two people he had never met"? Then there would be no question of whether "stranger" should include family members.

Of course, at this stage, changing the puzzle wording would simply confuse later readers as they wonder what the argument is about, so there is no particular point now. But in future tellings of the riddle, I think the "people he had never met" version works better than "stranger".
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by John_Gaughan on Feb 12th, 2004, 6:13pm
My mamma said not to talk to strangers, and you look really strange!!

Sorry, I just had to add my 2.7 cents...
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by SWF on Feb 12th, 2004, 6:24pm
To satisfy towr's definition of "stranger": the woman was in the car while entertaining two strangers, but the strangers were outside of the car watching the show through the closed windows.
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by Jess_13 on Feb 21st, 2004, 7:19am
???  :-*  :'(  ;D

Hey ppl,

Just beacause the doors are locked doesnt mean that they are closed...the strangers just got in the car.. the doors were open..but they were locked... get it?
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by Amanda on Jul 22nd, 2004, 9:23am
They were driving a convertible
Title: Re: woman in locked car
Post by EZ Lonny on Jul 27th, 2004, 5:38am
I think he forgot about the hitchhikers he picked up 50 miles back.


Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4!
Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board