I think I enjoy the nuances of the language more because of a long love of solving (and setting) cryptic crosswords, where word-play and alternate meanings litter every puzzle.
The most satisfying clues to solve (and compose) are often the 'pure' cryptic types, where we are unwittingly and laterally led up the garden path until the penny finally drops.
Cryptic puzzles are well known for being scrupulously fair to the solver, despite the atrocious amount of trickery and decepion employed by the setter. In other words, there must always be the correct and sufficient amount of information in the clue to allow it to be solved.
This maxim for fair play was famously stated by a setter using the pseudonym 'Afrit' (Alastair Ferguson Richie) and is known as
Afrit's Injunction.
It runs along the lines of: "We must expect the composer to play tricks, but we shall insist that he play fair. The Book of the Crossword lays this injunction upon him: "
You need not mean what you say, but you must say what you mean." This is a superior way of saying that he can't have it both ways. He may attempt to mislead by employing a form of words which can be taken in more than one way, and it is your fault if you take it the wrong way, but it is his fault if you can't logically take it the right way."
A few of my favourites:
- A stiff examination? (4,6)
- A number of people (11)
- A bar of soap? (3,6,6)