Аннотация:Semantic link between text of a riddle and its solution should not be obvious - otherwise the solving is trivial, and
will not cause interest. Denotat of the riddles (actually its solution) replaces a logical variable in the riddle. This
variable sometimes is named “The Wolf of iron, and the tail of linen” = a needle and a thread; expressed by a
personal pronoun “I am small, I am daring, when I enter the palace, the king wakes up”= a flea; or by an empty
variable “X has passed through the earth, and found a red cap” = a mushroom, etc. [1] In all cases, a variable should be substituted by the denotat, i.e. the clue, and sometimes, but not always, if the variable is named, its very
name hints at the answer: “A pear hanging, nobody can eat it” = light bulb - bulb is pear-shaped, both are
feminine nouns, inanimate (in Russian). In other cases, the denotat is not consistent with the substitute neither
grammatically, nor semantically (Wolf + tail, needle + thread).
The text of a riddle and its solution should probably have some semantic relationship, otherwise one could
substitute any constant as the solution, and the riddle would become meaningless. Identification of the semantic
links can be based on an explanatory dictionary as well as on the National corpus of (Russian) language.
Consider the riddle “X has four legs, but not a beast, feathered, but not a bird” = a bed. It should be noted
that restrictions are imposed on the denotat: ~ (X ≡ beast), ~ (X ≡ bird).
Dictionary [2] provides an explanation of each word of the riddle. We choose a chain containing only those
words that satisfy the above constraints: leg - furniture – four - bed – feather-bed - feather . Dictionary-established
connection between the two hallmarks of denotation: Part-of (X, legs), Part-of (X, feathers). Using relationships
Hypo(furniture, bed); Part-of(bed, legs); Part-of(Bed, Feather-bed); Part-of(Feather-bed, feathers), transitivity of
Part-of, we have: Part-of(bed, feathers), Part-of(bed, legs). Solution is: X = {bed}. However, the same riddle may
be solved by substitution X = {a drunken Indian} (standing on four legs and is decorated with feathers).
More difficult is a riddle like this one: “a yokel runs through the woods, a mirror thrust under his belt shines"
In this case, the dictionaries do not reveal any connection between the riddle and its solution, these connections
are expressed by associative links which can be found in corpora [3].
axe - belt - shine – mirror:
- Hunter’s son thrusts an ax under his belt, ... [M. Prishvin. Sun pantry (1945)]
- Vladimir opened the door and stumbled upon a man, huddled in a corner - an ax shone in his hand ... [A.
Pushkin. Dubrovsky (1833)]
- Bluish night haze drifted over marshy plain, lakes shone as pink mirrors … [I. Efremov. Razor's Edge
(1959-1963)]
The solution is connected with the riddle through the texts of corpus. mirror = ax, but it can also be found
another connection yokel = stream (running through the woods and shines like a mirror).
Solution ambiguity is rooted in the very nature of the riddle, that is the solution should be known, not
discovered. This knowledge may serve to distinguish a fellow or a stranger in traditional cultures. Nevertheless the
search for connections between a riddle and its solution allows one to define a measure of the riddle complexity
and arrange them on a scale where vocable + definition in the dictionary is the lower end (0), and the upper end
of complexity (1) is the automatically generated login and password. In particular, the riddles of different
complexity can be used to test information retrieval systems