quote:

---

How many letters are there in the answer to this question?

---

quote:

---

How many letters are there in the correct answer to this question?

---

Edited to add: One of my answers has to be right.

However, I take issue with the question itself, which isn't really a question. I agree that one can use "four", but I also think one can use any number of answers since the "question" is vague, and can stand for any number of things. I mean, what if "four" isn't the correct answer? What if it was "sixteen", so the answer would be seven. The problem, I think, is that we're never shown the "question".

So?

The answer simply has to be defined as equivalent to the number of letters it's spelled with. If spanish is allowed, 'cinco' would work also.

as an alternate example consider

"What color is the answer to this question?"
"Black."

The answer refers to it's own color. I could choose to say red in red color and so on.

The basic idea is that the answers holds it's own meta-data.

Another example:
What language is the answer to this question written in?
English.
Espan~ol.
Deutch.
Francais.

All these words carry meta-data about themselves - their language. They are the answer and have the characteristic the answer refers to.

The question defines what it is asking for within the first three words.

First, it asks, "How many?" That tells you that it is looking for a numerical value, a quantity.

Next, it asks, "How many letters?" That tells you the quantity of what you are looking for.

Then it is a process of elimination to find the numerical value that creates a correct, or true, statement.

billawaboy is right when he says that 'cinco' for 'five' would work if this were in Spanish. Very clever.

I hope this helps.

And I hope you've had fun with this little riddle. Okay, so it might be frustrated fun but hopefully not just frustration.

***LOST SPOILER ALERT*** - OF COURSE IF YOU DIDN'T SEE IT YOU PROBABLY DIDN'T CARE
In regards to Lost, I enjoyed the reunion, but I was a little disappointed. In some ways I began to want a split reality ending (one happy and one like what actually happened). Not saying that going to wherever they were going wasn't "happy", but it would have been nice if they could have all gotten their "new" lives together and grown old and had (or kept) their children. If dying makes everyone so happy, then why isn't everyone dying to do it? (There's a logic question).

As to lost, I guess it's finally time for me to hit up my friends to borrow their dvd's. It's a plan I hatched back when they started sacrificing pacing for longevity.

Lost is kind of like the Little Prince in that way, if you just read the surface it's a cute intriguing little story, but that's not the reason it is so many people's favorite book. That reason is what the reader took from it, and the answers the reader makes for themselves. No one questions what a snake really looks like from the inside, and I think fans won't question what the smoke monster actually is or how it was made.

Here's a link to a rip'em'up review of the Lost finale on Big Hollywood...

"How many letters are there?" is the actual question.

"in the answer to this question" is a prepositional phrase that refers back to the presumed question.

If "this question" refers to "How many letters are there?" then the answer could be 8 or 9 depending on if the same letter can be counted twice - the answer for the English alphabet is 26 (comprised of 9 letters, including 2 "t's")

If "in" refers to the words "the answer to this question" then the answer is either 12 or 23.

If the question refers to the word "letters" then the answer is 1.

You're right that the core question is "How many letters are there?" (If that was all there was to it the answer, depending on the language, is 26.)

Then it is modified by the preposition "In the answer." And then that preposition is modified by its own preposition, "to this question." "To this question," does not modify "How many letters are there."

If we talk through it:
Person 1: "How many letters are there?"
Person 2: "In what?"
Person 1: "In the answer."
Person 2: "The answer to what?"
Person 1: "To this question."

If someone said to you, "I want to shoot at the monkeys in those trees." They'd be saying they want to shoot the monkeys, not that they want to shoot in those trees. That's just where the monkeys are.

Ecks-eye-eye-vee

All the other breakdowns are using syntax to explain, not logic.

Technically, since the question is asking for a quantity, a numerical value, there doesn't have to be any letters in it, so zero works just fine. It's like asking, how many feathers are there on your body? Just because the question asks for a certain criteria, doesn't mean the criteria exists.

Let me try a little more though.

The question asks: How many letters?

You're right when you say it could be answered with a numerical value but there is still only one answer that makes the statement correct. That's why I had the version with the little addendum. Let's check it out.

If you say the answer is 0 - well, regardless of whether you put a numerical '0' or 'zero', there are still four letters in 'zero'. So, if you answer of zero has four letters in it, it cannot be correct for the exact reason that zero has four letters in it. It is like saying 0=4.

Likewise, consider the conversation if you answer three:

A) How many letters are in this answer?
B) Three.
A) No, by your answer, there are five.

There is only one answer where the numerical value and the actual number of letters in the word match, thus making the statement correct, and that is Four

Hope this helps.

Oh well, how about those Bears?

quote:

---

How many letters are there in the answer to this question?

---

Regarding diagramming - I am very good at this (I went to high school and college, majoring in English, when this was still being taught).

In questions, the subject and direct object appear to be inverted. "There", a pronoun, is the subject, "are" is the verb, "How" is an adverb modifying the adjective "many", which modifies the DO - "letters". Then we have two prepositional phrases, as you mentioned, that modify the first part of the sentence.
- "in the answer" clearly modifies "letters", specifying where they are located.
- "to this question" does modify "answer", but is less specific. "This" is an adjective either self-referential or referring to another "question". It is a nonspecified modifyer.

Pyre, this is nothing like: "I want to shoot at the monkeys in those trees."

It is more like: "How many monkeys are there to shoot at in this question?"

Are we waiting for another question?
Are we supposed to come up with both question and answer?
Are we referring to the question itself?

This is where interpretation comes into play. To paraphrase a famous quote, it all depends on what the meaning of "this" is.

If, in the first question, the answer is "four", then "this" refers to another question.

It could read like the following:
1 - How many letters are there in the answer to this [certain] question?
- This is asking for a question and answer that are the same, but from a different question. "This question" is: Four? "How many letters in the answer" is: 4.
2 - How many letters are there in the answer to this [same] question?
This can be read a few ways:
- How many letters are there [in the answer to this question]? - (twenty-six/8-9)
- How many "letters" are there [in the answer to this question]? - (1)
- How many letters are there in "the answer to this question"? - (12 or 23)

Now that I have run this debate completely in the ground, how about something completely random:

In 1986, my college biology professor suggested that I might be a mutant due to an abnormality in my blood type.