Buffalo buffalo...

It has been submitted to me by a reader (whom I have not seen in three years) that "Buffalo" was a disappointing entry name because it in no way pertained to the fact that one can write an entire sentence using only the word Buffalo. Well Chris, here you go.

"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."

Believe it or not folks, this sentence is grammatically correct. It has been discussed by linguist buffs with entirely too much time on their hands since an William J. Rapaport, an associate English professor from the city of Buffalo, first used it in 1972.*

It takes advantage of the fact that the word Buffalo is

1) a noun (the animal) which is spelled the same whether singular or plural
2) A proper noun, Buffalo New York
3) A verb meaning, to bully or to intimidate.

This sentence, although correct reads awkwardly because it does not make any use of articles or determiners.

Lets see what happens when we put them back in

Buffalo buffalo that Buffalo buffalo buffalo also buffalo buffalo

or more specifically

Buffalo from Buffalo, that are buffaloed by buffalo from Buffalo, also buffalo buffalo from Buffalo

Now I will replace the city of Buffalo with "Upland" and the animal buffalo with "people" and the verb buffalo with "bully"

People from upland, that are bulled by other people in upland, still bully yet OTHER people in upland themselves.

In essence, these buffalo are total jerks. Even though these other bully buffalo are picking on them, they spin right around and pick on other dumber, smaller buffalo. My question is, are all buffalo total butt wipes or is there something particularly venomous about the ones that hail from Buffalo?

Thank you Chris for your astute observation, and screw you English language for being so freaking complicated. You wonder why immigrants haven't learned English yet? Cause Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.



*I am not making this up