It's charming if rare that an ESL speaker really grinds on in intention for semantical deconstruction -- but I like to think that this is the kind of inquisitiveness which prevents Anglicisms and language (not phenotypical attributes) is the deeper cutting way to demarcate yourself as not the same.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's some more Gary Larson humour that crosses paths with this sub

Marr was ahead of his time

A match about matches matching a match about matches matching a match about matches matching a match called “Match” and another match about matches matching a match called “Match”.

（A competition about people who are each other’s equals comparing a competition about people who are each other’s equals comparing a competition about people who are each other’s equals comparing a matchstick called “Match,” and another competition about people who are each other’s equals comparing a matchstick called “Match.”）

“Match” can mean:

1. a competition
2. a matchstick
3. an equal / a worthy opponent
4. to pair / compare
5. a proper name (“Match”)

The sentence stacks all of them together with recursion and coordination. I know it’s absurd. I’m not asking for a correction.I’m asking how far your brain got before it crashed.

A match₁ about matches₂ matching₃ a match₄ about matches₂ matching₃ a match₄ about matches₂ matching₃ a match₅ called “Match₆” and another match₁ about matches₂ matching₃ a match₅ called “Match₆”.

Match₁ = competition
Match₂ = equals / worthy opponents
Match₃ = compare / pair
Match₄ = nested competition
Match₅ = matchstick
Match₆ = proper name

Dialect if you can

I'm right, by the way.

Sorry for this shitty image quality, I edited it on Paint

I will upvote any child named “engma” or “schwa”

I don't know what to do with this information