{"commentics_url":"\/\/intelligencetest.com\/comsys\/","page_id":208,"enabled_country":false,"country_id":0,"enabled_state":false,"state_id":0,"enabled_upload":false,"maximum_upload_amount":3,"maximum_upload_size":5,"maximum_upload_total":5,"securimage":false,"securimage_url":"\/\/intelligencetest.com\/comsys\/3rdparty\/securimage\/securimage_show.php?namespace=cmtx_208","cmtx_wait_for_comment":"cmtx_wait_for_comment","lang_error_file_num":"A maximum of %d files are allowed to be uploaded","lang_error_file_size":"Please upload files no bigger than %d MB in size","lang_error_file_total":"The total size of all files must be less than %d MB","lang_error_file_type":"Only image file types are allowed to be uploaded","lang_text_loading":"Loading ..","lang_placeholder_country":"Country","lang_placeholder_state":"State","lang_text_country_first":"Please select a country first","lang_button_submit":"Add Comment","lang_button_preview":"Preview","lang_button_remove":"Remove","lang_button_processing":"Please Wait.."}
That's a legitimate objection. Let's look into this further.
(Whitesmith : Whitecap :: Whitewash : Whitetail) is appropriate due to its simplicity and straightforwardness by maintaining a single consistent element ("white").
Your proposed solution:
(Blacksmith: Whitecap :: Whitewash : Blackbird) creates an interesting pattern, however it also makes the relationship less immediately clear.
If the first two terms were reversed however, i.e. (Whitecap : Blacksmith :: Whitewash : Blackbird), there could have been a more convincing case due to the clear and balanced use of alternation between two opposing concepts/prefixes (white:black::white:black, instead of black:white:: white:black)
{"commentics_url":"\/\/intelligencetest.com\/comsys\/","page_id":208,"is_permalink":false,"lang_text_view":"View","lang_text_reply":"reply","lang_text_replies":"replies","lang_text_replying_to":"You are replying to","lang_title_cancel_reply":"Cancel this reply","lang_link_cancel":"[Cancel]","lang_text_not_replying":"You are not replying to anyone","lang_button_loading":"Loading..","lang_button_more":"More Comments","date_auto":true,"show_pagination":true,"pagination_type":"button","timeago_suffixAgo":"ago","timeago_inPast":"a moment","timeago_seconds":"less than a minute","timeago_minute":"a minute","timeago_minutes":"%d minutes","timeago_hour":"an hour","timeago_hours":"%d hours","timeago_day":"a day","timeago_days":"%d days","timeago_month":"a month","timeago_months":"%d months","timeago_year":"a year","timeago_years":"%d years"}
Comments (4)
Why not: blacksmith, whitecap: whitewash, blackbird
That's a legitimate objection. Let's look into this further.
(Whitesmith : Whitecap :: Whitewash : Whitetail) is appropriate due to its simplicity and straightforwardness by maintaining a single consistent element ("white").
Your proposed solution:
(Blacksmith: Whitecap :: Whitewash : Blackbird) creates an interesting pattern, however it also makes the relationship less immediately clear.
If the first two terms were reversed however, i.e. (Whitecap : Blacksmith :: Whitewash : Blackbird), there could have been a more convincing case due to the clear and balanced use of alternation between two opposing concepts/prefixes (white:black::white:black, instead of black:white:: white:black)
Tail. Whitesmith, whitecaps, whitewash, and whitetail, are all words that start with 'white'.
white-tailed deer
nice question, learnt new phrases