|
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Akridrot |
Is a grammatically valid sentence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffal...Buffalo_buffalo
Similar ones, all of which make sense which make sense of all of which make sense:
"That that that that had been had been that that that had been had been unexpected"
"I wonder whether the wether will weather the weather, or whether the wether the weather will kill"
"That that is is that that that that is not is not."
"The last boss she had had had had enough of her."
"John, where Bill had had 'had', had had 'had had'. 'Had had' had had the teacher's approval."
Buffalo buffalo, Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Bore bore bore bore bore bore bore bore bore bore bore.
Who polices the police? - The police police. So, who polices the police police? Police police police police police police.
Wouldn't the sentence 'I want to put a hyphen between the words Fish and And and And and Chips in my Fish-And-Chips sign' have been clearer if quotation marks had been placed before Fish, and between Fish and and, and and and And, and And and and, and and and And, and And and and, and and and Chips, as well as after Chips? |
|
|
| pvdAngel |
| That made my day. :D |
|
|
| Psy-T |
that that is is that that is not is not is that it it is
or
is that not it that it that is it is not it that is not that |
|
|
| Protege |
| I think I just crapped my pants:( |
|
|
| jdat |
omfg!
Grammatical p0rn! :D |
|
|
| Akridrot |
I fully comprehend it all.
To understand this sentence:
| quote: | Originally posted by Akridrot
Buffalo buffalo, Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
|
First look at this sentence:
Dogs dogs dog dog dogs
The syntax is similar to:
People dogs bother chase dogs.
Dogs [that other] dogs dog, dog [other] dogs.
So: Dogs dogs dog dog dogs. GET IT?
Now to understand the buffalo sentence, the first four Buffalo's are talking about Buffalo's FROM Buffalo. "Buffalo's Buffalo", so to speak. So:
Buffalo buffalo [that] Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffalo [other] Buffalo buffalo.
Suppose Hurt was a place. And there were animals called "Hurt" in Hurt.
Hurt hurt, Hurt hurt hurt, hurt Hurt hurt.
Make sense? |
|
|
| pvdAngel |
| quote: | Originally posted by jdat
omfg!
Grammatical p0rn! :D |
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:conf:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
 :crazy: :tongue2 |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by Akridrot
Now to understand the buffalo sentence, the first four Buffalo's are talking about Buffalo's FROM Buffalo. "Buffalo's Buffalo", so to speak. So:
Buffalo buffalo [that] Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffalo [other] Buffalo buffalo. |
the main problem with the buffalo sentence is that the word buffalo is archaic as a verb. |
|
|
| Temperate |
this thread made me think so much
it kinda pisses me off. |
|
|
| Akridrot |
| quote: | Originally posted by Psy-T
the main problem with the buffalo sentence is that the word buffalo is archaic as a verb. |
I had a feeling it was. But I assumed it was more 'obscure' than 'archaic'.
Honestly, your examples confused the out of me because I CANNOT wrap my head around them. They are utterly confusing. |
|
|
| Psy-T |
is that not that that is that that is it is not is that that that is not that that that is not it is is that that that is not it that that that that is not it is not
edit:
Is that(object) not that(object) that is?
That(object), that is, it is not.
Is that that(object) that is not?
That that(object) that is not, it is.
Is that that(object) that-is-not, it?
That that(object) that that(object) is not, it is not.
2nd edit: spaced the lines to make it even easier
3rd edit: my explanation was more confusing than the riddle itself :p |
|
|
|
|
