ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
It's possible to create a grammatically correct and semantically watertight sentence in English as follows:
"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."
(The capitalization of the the first, third, and seventh instances of 'Buffalo' is very important, don't forget it)
One reason for this is that the word "Buffalo" can have any of three meanings in English:
1) the city of Buffalo, New York
2) an animal, the buffalo, which is also 'buffalo' when plural
3) the verb "to buffalo" synonymous with "to bully, confuse, deceive, or intimidate."
The other reason is the fact that we English have a nasty habit of omitting our relative pronouns, which occurs in this sentence. In the explanation of this sentence's meaning, I shall include a relative pronounce in brackets.
The sequence is as follows:
Buffalo(1) buffalo(2)[, which] Buffalo(1) buffalo(2) buffalo(3)[,] buffalo(3) Buffalo(1) buffalo(2).
If we replace each Buffalo with a synonym for its specific meaning, then reverse the order of the noun phrases by restructuring them as a preposition followed by a dative, we get a clearer sentence:
"Bison from Buffalo[, which] Bison from Buffalo bully, bully Bison from Buffalo."
That, in turn, is taken to mean:
"Bison from Buffalo, whom other Bison from Buffalo bully, themselves bully Bison from Buffalo."
"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."
(The capitalization of the the first, third, and seventh instances of 'Buffalo' is very important, don't forget it)
One reason for this is that the word "Buffalo" can have any of three meanings in English:
1) the city of Buffalo, New York
2) an animal, the buffalo, which is also 'buffalo' when plural
3) the verb "to buffalo" synonymous with "to bully, confuse, deceive, or intimidate."
The other reason is the fact that we English have a nasty habit of omitting our relative pronouns, which occurs in this sentence. In the explanation of this sentence's meaning, I shall include a relative pronounce in brackets.
The sequence is as follows:
Buffalo(1) buffalo(2)[, which] Buffalo(1) buffalo(2) buffalo(3)[,] buffalo(3) Buffalo(1) buffalo(2).
If we replace each Buffalo with a synonym for its specific meaning, then reverse the order of the noun phrases by restructuring them as a preposition followed by a dative, we get a clearer sentence:
"Bison from Buffalo[, which] Bison from Buffalo bully, bully Bison from Buffalo."
That, in turn, is taken to mean:
"Bison from Buffalo, whom other Bison from Buffalo bully, themselves bully Bison from Buffalo."
Band Things
First and foremost, here's a cover of Inner Temple's Red: https://soundcloud.com/fredericus-rex/ronald-raygun-red-cover-of
Secondly, the band to which I am a member (Ronald Raygun) now has a Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/RonaldRaygunPA
Linguistic musings...
Since many (if not most) of my watchers are familiar with German or Old English, we are both familiar with the 4-case system of Germanic languages in general, as well as with the common "umlaut-plurals" (exhibited in German in words like "Schwan" versus "Schwäne" (Swan, Swans); "Mann" versus "Männer" (Man, Men). We see it in English with words such as "Goose" versus "Geese," and "Mouse" versus "Mice."
Both of these features of Germanic languages are unexplained so far, as other Indo-European languages either have 7 (or more) cases or have abandoned the case system altogether, and have different ways of forming plurals.
HOWEVER
Th
Vardan Tos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKnD99jro8Y
I like me some of that Lithuanian chica,
Aistė Smilgevičiūtė.
Mull this over...
Not that Satanism and black metal don't go hand in hand, but I think somebody should write a twangy Satanic country song just for shits and giggles.
© 2014 - 2024 Fredericus-Rex
Comments1
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
more gutgewird