[Ann Drysdale]

Sounds like a severe case of ISIHAC to me...

[Jerome Betts]

As it might be, John, whitewart, one of those mysterious chalky blebs that occasionally appear on the back of the hand. So, delete h, add an e, change o to a.

[Brian Allgar]

The problem is, Jerome, that I think three words are needed, one for each modification, not a single word using all three changes (although the wording of the competition is ambiguous) - as it might be:

Whitworthy, shitworth, and witworth

with of course accompanying definitions. Sounds like a tough one to me.

[Jerome Betts]

Thank you, Brian. I suppose the semi-colons, which I didn't notice, are a clue, but I think an example lke yours might have made things clearer.

[Chris O'Carroll]

These were the results last time this competition ran (in 2010):

http://www.spectator.co.uk/life/dive...ompetition-24/

[Brian Allgar]

Encumber

a) encrumber: someone who works in a fish-processing factory operating the machine that coats the fish fingers and nuggets in breadcrumbs.

b) enyumber: someone who works in a fish-processing factory operating the machine that ensures that the fish fingers and nuggets are sufficiently ‘yummy’ by injecting them with concentrated fish flavouring and monosodium glutamate.

c) encuber: someone who works in a fish-processing factory operating the machine that chops the fish into cube-shaped nuggets.

[Roger Slater]

So let me get this straight. Adding, changing, deleting . . . but all of them are done on the initial word? In other words, the word you are changing a letter of as per "b" is the original word, and not the word you created by adding a letter as per "a"?