Life Sentences #2

Today’s sentence is some easy shit, people. It’s in fact one of the simplest, most valuable sentences in the language, the one without which we’d really have no occasion to elaborate on stuff like why we like cycling, sirloin steak, French wine, Frank Zappa, and many other items that somehow aren’t managing to cross my mind right now. See, in order to elaborate, we must first say what something is. We must first say, This is good. Then we can say why it’s good!

The type of sentence to which I refer (ain’t it amazing I can to that to-which shit?) is what we call the subject/subject-complement pattern. How it works: The subject of the sentence is a noun or a pronoun (a thing) then we have a nifty to be verb and then a noun or an adjective that defines the meaning of the subject, thus ‘complementing’ the subject.

Hold on, Magnuson. What the fuck you talking that fancy shit for?

Let’s make it easier. If I write, Frank Zappa is a God, quite clearly and quite correctly I am according Godlike status to Frank Zappa. The word God is a noun but because it clarifies my view of Frank Zappa, because it further defines Frank Zappa, we consider God to be an adjective.

So the sentence of the day:

Mike Magnuson is a dipstick.

Analysis:

Mike Magnuson (a noun, the subject of the sentence) is (to be verb) an dipstick (a noun used as an adjective that excellent describes Mike Magnuson).

Further Analysis:

You want me to explain why?