The point of language is to convey meaning. Grammar is less important than what the speaker wants to tell other people.
If this sentence, in context of a larger conversation, has meaning to the people listening to it, then congratulations! Rejoice, for communication has been achieved! Whether it was grammatically correct or not is irrelevant, because the intended target understands.
Language changes over time. Nobody just decided to come up with modern English one day and it caught on, it’s a gross pot filled with words and grammar from many other languages (some more melted than others, so not really a melting pot), and mostly filtered from a language nobody speaks anymore.
So having what are essentially arbitrary rules that dictate how things must always be for that language is already pretty dumb to me.
But Escher sentences eschew that, because they are gramatically fine but convey no real meaning. Which is why a paradox like “this sentence is a lie” counts as one. And I like them because escher sentences are a rebel jist like me frfr
Yes but my point is that if it conveys meaning to the intended target, it’s irrelevant.
Plenty of sentences, out of context, have no real meaning. The example in OP is one that could have meaning in the right context, which would be understood by its recipient
You’re both looking at it from completely different angles.
You’re seeing it at a way to criticise someone’s grammar; they’re looking at it as a puzzle to construct a grammatically correct sentence without imparting any meaning.
This is one of those points that, although correct, is so vague as to be largely pointless unless discussing miscommunication or something of the like. Or are you suggesting we are never allowed to talk about sentence structure or logic again?
Folks that spend time sniping grammatical errors are boring. I’ll go out of my way to decipher someone’s weird ass sentence structure just so they feel understood. Say your grammatically inccorect Yoda sounding shit to me please.
But it’s not sniping grammatical errors, it’s constructing a sentence that feels right but is devoid of meaning. This is a puzzle, not someone’s embarrassment.
The point of language is to convey meaning. Grammar is less important than what the speaker wants to tell other people.
If this sentence, in context of a larger conversation, has meaning to the people listening to it, then congratulations! Rejoice, for communication has been achieved! Whether it was grammatically correct or not is irrelevant, because the intended target understands.
Language changes over time. Nobody just decided to come up with modern English one day and it caught on, it’s a gross pot filled with words and grammar from many other languages (some more melted than others, so not really a melting pot), and mostly filtered from a language nobody speaks anymore.
So having what are essentially arbitrary rules that dictate how things must always be for that language is already pretty dumb to me.
But Escher sentences eschew that, because they are gramatically fine but convey no real meaning. Which is why a paradox like “this sentence is a lie” counts as one. And I like them because escher sentences are a rebel jist like me frfr
such a flex to put Escher and eschew so close together 🙌
Yes but my point is that if it conveys meaning to the intended target, it’s irrelevant.
Plenty of sentences, out of context, have no real meaning. The example in OP is one that could have meaning in the right context, which would be understood by its recipient
You’re both looking at it from completely different angles.
You’re seeing it at a way to criticise someone’s grammar; they’re looking at it as a puzzle to construct a grammatically correct sentence without imparting any meaning.
This is one of those points that, although correct, is so vague as to be largely pointless unless discussing miscommunication or something of the like. Or are you suggesting we are never allowed to talk about sentence structure or logic again?
Agree with this 100%
Folks that spend time sniping grammatical errors are boring. I’ll go out of my way to decipher someone’s weird ass sentence structure just so they feel understood. Say your grammatically inccorect Yoda sounding shit to me please.
But it’s not sniping grammatical errors, it’s constructing a sentence that feels right but is devoid of meaning. This is a puzzle, not someone’s embarrassment.
I was responding to the parent comment not to OP.
And to be fair, if the person in OP may have just found the most ridiculous way to say they’ve never been to Berlin.