In an analogy ":" means "is to" and "::" means "as/like". Now, since this is almost an analogy (maybe a future type), I will accept the solution if it's almost correct.

Kinberg : ‴niɘɈƨnɘƨiƎ‴  :: ?


Since there is clearly no third word, we need to reconsider what the :, :: notations really mean.


In the centre of the concept, there are numbers.


Mr.Kinberg is mainly a producer but sometimes he directs. Mr.Eisenstein is a movie maker too, but sometimes he is not.


Consider what a:b means if a,b are numbers. Also, something spelled backwards will result in a different something of its kind. Moreover any of the possible three anagrams (permutations) is of the same kind. From here on, you choose one of the three and then just let things happen to you!

  • $\begingroup$ Just wondering here but is there intentionally no word you're trying to draw an analogy to (i.e. x : y :: z : ?) $\endgroup$ – Daneolog Jun 9 '20 at 19:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Daneolog, there is no "z", intentionally. $\endgroup$ – FIreCase Jun 10 '20 at 12:38
  • $\begingroup$ Gur pbbeqvangrf bs Xvaoret ner: 47.59 62 A 9. 83 89 R. Bs gurfr pbbeqvangrf, 47, 59, 83, 89 ner Rvfrafgrva cevzrf. Nz V ba gur evtug genpx? $\endgroup$ – John Brookfields Jun 10 '20 at 19:57
  • $\begingroup$ John Brookfields, Not really, but the "paramount part" of the idea is on the right track $\endgroup$ – FIreCase Jun 11 '20 at 8:50
  • $\begingroup$ @FIreCase paramount part?. $\endgroup$ – John Brookfields Jun 11 '20 at 18:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.