Sometimes, someone says somthing during dinner that warrants further investigation. Here is a clever conversation starter:
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
The sentence is unpunctuated and uses three different readings of the word "buffalo". In order of their first use, these are
- a. the city of Buffalo, NY, which is used as an adjective in the sentence and is followed by the animal;
- n. the noun, "buffalo", an animal, in the plural (equivalent to "buffaloes" or "buffalos"), in order to avoid articles;
- v. the verb, "buffalo" meaning to bully, confuse, deceive, or intimidate.
Marking each "buffalo" with its use as shown above gives you:
Buffaloa buffalon Buffaloa buffalon buffalov buffalov Buffaloa buffalon. Thus, the sentence parsed:
[Those] (Buffalo buffalo) [whom] (Buffalo buffalo) buffalo, buffalo (Buffalo buffalo).[Those] buffalo(es) from Buffalo [that are intimidated by] buffalo(es) from Buffalo intimidate buffalo(es) from Buffalo. "Buffalo buffalo (main clause Subject) [which the] Buffalo buffalo (subordinate clause Direct Object) buffalo [subordinate clause Verb] buffalo [main clause Verb] Buffalo buffalo [main clause Direct Object]."
It may be revealing to read the sentence replacing all instances of the animal buffalo with "people" and the verb buffalo with "intimidate". The sentence then reads:
"Buffalo people [whom] Buffalo people intimidate [also happen to] intimidate Buffalo people."
Homonyms and homophones can twist your brain.
Anyone have another?
.