[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 2 KB, 400x67, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835250 No.14835250 [Reply] [Original]

>this is a valid english sentence
explain yourself

>> No.14835257
File: 33 KB, 400x415, Der Katzenfischer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835257

>>14835250

>> No.14835261

I don't see how. Where is the main clause?

>> No.14835267

>>14835261
James, while John had had "had", had had "had had"; "had had" had had a better effect on the teacher.

>> No.14835271

>>14835267
With the punctuation it's completely intelligible. Can ESLs not understand it?

>> No.14835276

>>14835250
>explain yourself
Non-Anglos can't into superior analytic languages.

>> No.14835279

>>14835271
I just think its funny man

>> No.14835284
File: 467 KB, 1348x764, das Mädchen hinter der Theke.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835284

>>14835279
It is not funny without the punctuation.

>> No.14835288

>>14835284
Its only funny without the punctuation though

>> No.14835290

>>14835279
That that is is that that is not is not is that it it is

>> No.14835299
File: 235 KB, 745x1500, 2vhgoGN.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835299

Try finnish for a change.

>> No.14835307
File: 89 KB, 646x554, 1473390908.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835307

>>14835299

>> No.14835341

>>14835299
any more of these

>> No.14835350
File: 261 KB, 1080x1080, IxRjQxf.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835350

>>14835341

>> No.14835356
File: 363 KB, 500x1879, a-guide-to-the-finnish-language-in-english-the-spruce-34484031.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835356

>>14835350

>> No.14835363
File: 37 KB, 512x187, unnamed.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835363

>>14835356
Then there's the whole mess of how we build our words. Here's a simple version.

>> No.14835374
File: 191 KB, 1200x926, JyKSSJc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14835374

>>14835363
And here's a more complete one.

>> No.14835454

>>14835363
>istahdan is 'sit down' in Finnish but 'stand' in Persian
really makes me ponder

>> No.14835640

>>14835250
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo :^)

>> No.14835659

>>14835267
When I noticed the semicolon it all came together.

>> No.14835666

>>14835374
This seems like it would make Finnish a good language to write philosophy in. You could express complex ideas like "being-in-nature-for-and-in-itself-ness" in a single word.

>> No.14835682

>>14835666
You just did it in a single word though. Based hyphen.

>> No.14836392

>>14835299
>>14835307
>>14835350
>>14835356
>>14835363
>>14835374
As an Estonian I can see some logic in all of this "nonsense".

>> No.14836562

>>14835271
I can understand it perfectly without a shadow of ambiguity. In my English school we were taught “had had”. I think it’s burgers complaining about their own language like some Brazilians complain about the four whys.

>> No.14836678

>>14836392
I mean, the structure of the Finnish is ultimately a very logical. And Estonian language is part of the same family, and the closest in similarity to Finnish, so of course you'd notice.

>> No.14836736

>>14835288
It's not funny at all with or without the punctuation.

>> No.14836774

>>14835350
Brainlet language

>> No.14838164

>>14835250
>had had had had had had had had had had had
the word feels funny in my head now lol

>> No.14838202

>>14835250
>this is a valid english sentence
Only if you look at language as an arbitrary set of rigid rules.
In fact, the primary role of langauge is to express meaning in a way that is understandable by others within a certain context. Underlying any other arbitrary rules of language should be this key rule.
Because this sentence fails to do this in most normal english contexts, can it really be considered a "valid" english sentence?

>> No.14838232

It’s not valid without the punctuation, dingus. Write the sentence properly and it’s perfectly understandable, even if it is awkwardly phrased.

>> No.14838240

Wenn hinter Robben Robben robben, robben Robben Robben hinterher.

>> No.14838253

Como como? Como como como!

>> No.14838255

Would any Finnish person please explain this shit on behalf of their language/people?

>> No.14838261

>>14838253
Without tildes it's not a valid sentence.

>> No.14838285

>>14835250
A rube goldberg machine is also a valid method to accomplish a task.

>> No.14838384

>>14838255
Torilla tavataan

>> No.14838415

>>14838255
Indo-Yuro fags having their brains melted LMAO
Just read the wikipedia article dummy.

>> No.14838448
File: 120 KB, 1044x598, IMG_20200305_215619.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14838448

>>14835250
Verse by al-Mutanabbi:
>'alamun 'alamma 'alam 'ulimma bi-dā'ihi
>'in 'annā 'ānnun 'āna 'ānu 'awānihi
Word for word:
>pain / struck / didn't / (I) know / illness
>if / be in pain / sick one / came / time / ending

Translation:
Pain struck me, and I didn't know the illness
If the sick one is suffering, then the time of cure has surely arrived

>> No.14838509
File: 59 KB, 1024x914, 1582924675237.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14838509

You are like little babies
Watch this
https://www.bbc.com/pidgin

>> No.14838560

>>14835250
>>14835267
>>14835307
my goodness, germanic languages are the absolute niggerdom

>> No.14838570

>>14838253
>¿Cómo como? Como cómo como.
Fixed. I fucking hate how you guys can't into Spanish but are always crying like bitches when an ESL appears.

>> No.14838775

>>14838570
Wrong, it's
>¿Cómo como? Como comó como.
>How do I eat? I eat how (s)he ate.

>> No.14838806

>>14835250
Recursion is a feature of any Turing-complete language. Your language may just be less human.

>> No.14838836

>>14838775
>comó
Esa no es una conjugación anon

>> No.14838838

>>14835267
Quine quined “Quine quined”

>> No.14838850

>>14838836
Oh wait.
What the fuck is the point of your misleading accent on the 5th "como"? You don't do that for that sentence.
>How do I eat? I eat how I eat?
The thing is that this sentence is highly redundant, unlike the OP example. It's the same 2 words repeated in different contexts to deliver basically no message. English, however, is fucked.

>> No.14838861

>>14838806
bar-hillel and recursion pilled

>> No.14838901

>>14838850
It's not that redundant, anon. I can imagine a character from a 17th century play using it as a snarky reply.

>> No.14838907

This is probably the finest thing ever to be posted to Reddit

>The swindler was headed upstairs to visit his friend, the forger. The bird he passed along the way was the forger's homing vulture, which was en route to the forger's publisher to make a delivery. Unfortunately, the poor bird had to fly down the stairwell to ground level and out the open terrace since the forger's apartment had no windows. She was carrying some rolled up paper on which her owner had written the perfect end to his prized short story, what's delivery was a mission of utmost importance.
>You see, the forger was very proud of this story's ending as it unabashedly mocked the last two novellas in a complete collection written by his far more successful literary rival, Condolyssa Blackburn, who had worked to expose the forger's dishonesty by high-hatting his private dealings in said novellas, of which the forger grew thirsty for revenge. This same short story would later assist the forger in framing her for a homicide.
>So, the swindler in the stairwell knew of the forger's vulture, but he hated birds and went about swatting and cursing at her for flying around in the building. Though, little did the swindler realize that there was a third crook who had been hiding in the shadows of the stairwell above him. As the swindler rounded the corner and came into view, the young thief named Khan had already lept from the banister one floor up behind the swindler as he planned to knock the swindler down and take his money.
>As was indicative of his inexperience, young Khan did not notice the vulture until after he lept from the banister as he was too busy marking the swindler to notice the large bird flying past him on it's way down. The sight of the dutiful bird had caused the swindler to stop and swat and curse, which completely negated Khan's calculated leap, so as he fell toward where the swindler would have been had it not been for the vulture, he joined the swindler in cursing wildly at the bird because she had single-wingedly ruined his plan.
>Khan's midair cursing fit caught the attention of the swindler who sighted him, and since Khan was quite green and merely half his age, the swindler immediately began talking down to him, attempting to illustrate how feeble and worthless his attempt to swindle a swindler. Yet, as the swindler turned to continue his ascent upstairs, his pride had hindered him from noticing that Khan had successfully picked the wallet from his back pocket.

>> No.14838913

>>14838907
> the wallet from his back pocket.

Thus, Khan's incredibly embarrassing, albeit successful, incident is now humorously referred to among his fellow con men as the "greatest con ever botched," which is far less mentally demanding than what it was formerly referred to as, which was the "condescending conned ascending con dissenting condor-sending condescending con's descending condor sending condor-sending condescending con's dissenting conte's ending condescending con-dissenting Condi's ending condescending contes ending condescending Khan's descending on dissenting conned ascending con dissenting condor-sending condescending con's descending condor sending condor-sending condescending con's dissenting conte's ending condescending con-dissenting Condi's ending condescending contes sending condescending Khan descending condescending condor-sending condescending con's descending condor sending condor-sending condescending con's dissenting conte's ending condescending con-dissenting Condi's ending condescending contes ending condescending conned ascending con's dissenting on dissenting condor-sending con's descending condor sending condor-sending condescending con's dissenting conte's ending condescending con-dissenting Condi's ending condescending contes sending condescending conned ascending con's dissenting condor-sending condescending con's descending condor sending condor-sending condescending con's dissenting conte's ending condescending con-dissenting Condi's ending condescending contes on descending condescending Khan's descending" con.

>> No.14839198

>>14835350
This is simplified so finland seems like a brainlet language, do not be fooled

>> No.14839230

>>14835250
Throwing turds at a lightswitch is a valid way of illuminating a room.

>> No.14839875

>>14838570
Sorry I can't into goblin

>> No.14840406

>>14835267
i understand this well, but the op had no punctuation. would that still be considered a valid sentence without?

>> No.14840421

>>14840406
No.

>> No.14840627

>>14838560
>niggerdom
In what way? Theyre not comunicating with clicks and spears

>> No.14840633

>>14835267
I get it, but it doesnt make sense without the punctuation.

>> No.14840643

Sneed sneed Sneed sneed sneed sneed Sneed sneed.

>> No.14840667
File: 105 KB, 480x738, Buffalo buffalo etc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14840667

It is nonsense, don't overthink it. Pic related

>> No.14840724

>>14838560
Finnish is Uralic dingus

>> No.14840736

>>14835454
Also funny that "befarmaa" in Persian is "after you" in English
>before me
>after you

>> No.14840749

>>14835267
Based

>> No.14840862

>>14840643
Middle English version:
Chuck's chuck's Chuck's chuck's chuck's chuck's Chuck's chuck's.

>> No.14841049

>>14838850
fuck off useless shit

>> No.14841061

>>14838570
>>14838775
>>14838850
I'll say it JUST ONCE:
>¿Cómo como? Como como como

>> No.14841145

>>14835267
and what is "had" and "had had"?

>> No.14841153

>>14838560
>Finnish
>Germanic
what the fuck bro

>> No.14841510

>>14835267
Sentence makes no sense without the commas and quotations. Based post.