[Retros] linguistic hole

Otto Janko otto at janko.at
Sun Jan 17 11:24:27 EST 2010

> (d) invent a new term

What about "anselan-promotion"? "inheritor" is too technical :-)


> -----Original Message-----

> From: retros-bounces at janko.at

> [mailto:retros-bounces at janko.at] On Behalf Of andrew buchanan

> Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 3:09 PM

> To: Retros Mailing List

> Subject: [Retros] linguistic hole


> Dear Retrofriends,


> It seems to me there is a hole in our language for describing

> promotions.


> We like promotions, and we like to have diagrams which are

> free of non-thematic extraneous promoted units. So if there

> is a promotion, something may have to be captured at some

> point, to keep things looking nice.


> - If it's the promoted unit which is captured, we call it

> Ceriani-Frolkin and pat ourselves on the back.

> - If it's an original unit which is captured, we call the

> promoted unit Phoenix *but* *only* *if* *the *original*

> *unit* *died* *before* *the *promotion*.


> We haven't any term for the more general case of a non C-F

> promotee, where the diagram is free of extraneous promoted

> units of that type.


> Some problems are sometimes described as "double Phoenix", e.g.:


> Henrik Juel

> rnbqkb1r/ppppp1p1/8/3B4/8/4n3/PPPP1P1P/RNBQK1NR

> Thema Danicum no. 86, 1997/04

> (no. 22 in Alain Brobecker's Introduction to Proof Games)

> PG in 6.0 moves.


> But actually it isn't - only the second promotion is Phoenix.


> What we have here I suspect is another adoption of a non-PG

> term to the PG world, where it doesn't quite work the same way. See:


> http://dt.dewia.com/yacpdb/?id=271408

> www.selivanov.ru/download/Magazins/Kudesnik/Cud-104.pdf


> which are referring in the world of directmates to a Nissl

> theme (as a subtype of Phoenix I think) where the capture

> must come *immediately* before the promotion. Clearly in

> direct mates it is more elegant for the original unit to be

> saced before the promotee reappears. [Hmmm... Nissl could be

> an interesting theme for a PG exploration...] (Maybe others

> on the mailing list have more experience than I of use of the

> Phoenix theme in forwards composition.)


> But what should we do in PG world?

> (a) continue to abuse the term "Phoenix" some of the time

> (b) use the term "non-C-F"

> (c) decide that we don't need a word for this

> (d) invent a new term


> I think options a-c are unacceptable. I suggest the term

> "inheritor". So a Phoenixes is a kind of inheritor (a

> posthumous one! :). We have still no term for non-Phoenix

> inheritors, but let's not worry about that now.


> Comments welcome,

> Andy.


> _______________________________________________

> Retros mailing list

> Retros at janko.at

> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros


More information about the Retros mailing list