Explanations a bit of stress in the message posted before stack.
first 1024 words: deletion a letter (not a problem at that level) - lipogram 1.
512 words following: elimination of a second letter (not annoying) - 2. 256 words
following removal of a third letter (it starts to tighten) - 3. 128 words
following removal of a fourth letter - 4.
64 words: removal of a fifth letter - 5.
32 words following: removal of a sixth letter - 6.
16 words: deletion of a seventh letter - 7. 8
words: deletion of an eighth letter - 8.
four words: removal of a ninth letter - 9.
two words: removal of a tenth Letter - 10.
Last word: Removing an eleventh letter - 11.
(excluding involuntary absences other letters)
Let
2047 words (at least that's what the meter built into the word processor tells me, nothing to do with the movie sucks Wong Kar-Wai) said .
Incidentally, I have come to realize that 1984 (Orwell cuckoo) is 1024 + 512 + 256 + 128 + 64.
Note 1: the text is part of a larger whole, so what if the motivations (haha?) Are unclear.
(Note 1.5 of a few days later, the text is considered too weak to be part of a / the greater whole .)
Note 2: the text also contributes to a willingness of non-reversibility of its immediate predecessor, ie no correction of the text input (that's half true since it was first drafted in 1000, 500, 250 before to see a little further I can not decide between 62 or 63 words (half a word does not exist), but it is especially true for three quarters).
Note 3: Obviously, the letters from one to one can form a word, then another, then another, then another, then two, then two more, then.
Note 54: 1024 contains the word disappears in the letter that follows the 512 and so on. I have not pushed by the vice cons up alliterations (or vowels) in all directions.
0 comments:
Post a Comment