View Single Post
Old 2009-01-02, 13:30   #25
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

132·61 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaf View Post
"Good cooks cook good food for good rooks."

That's 15 o's in 33 letters, 45,5%
(Not bad for a non-native speaker, if I might say so myself ;))

I couldn't come up with a better word then rooks... seems a bit odd that good cook will cook at all for rooks...

Nice sentence!

Yes it is very odd but nobody said there had to be much chance of the sentence actually happening in real life...just that it makes gramatical and contectual sense. In other words, it is possible.

If the only definition of rook was the piece in a chess game, the sentence would still make gramatical sense but would not make contectual sense so it would not be allowed. After all, you can't cook for an inanimate object! lol


Gary
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote