Saturday, August 4, 2007

My New Mastering

You can become a "master" at pretty much anything. You can be a karate master (cool, numchucks). You can be a chess master (uh, laaaaaaame). You can be a master carpenter (bonus points for that). You can be a master-bater. (You had to see that coming.)

Seriously, do anything extra special, and you can be a master at it.

But while each of these things produces a reward (a black belt, an incurable case of the losers, a certificate, and, well, you know the last one), there is one master that has yet to be quantified.

That, my friends, is a master of the English language.

Being that I plan to spend the rest of my life using the English language to pay the bills, it only seems fair that we are able to judge on what level a person has the ability to correctly execute the intricacies of the English language. I mean, if auto mechanics can earn the title of "master," then anybody should be able to.

Thusly, I proffer (that's a erudite way of saying "offer"...isn't that stupid!?) the following: A rating system that quantifies one's understanding of the English language. With this, we'll be able to separate those who can't string together a coherent sentence (I'm looking at you, Rob Parker) from the true wordsmiths of the most confusing language in the world.

Using the following scale, you will be able to determine your ranking and abilities in relation to your verbal capabilities. See where you rank and let me know.

1. Slack-jawed yokel: If you watch "The Simpsons" and know Cletis, and you think you might be a direct decedent of one of his kin, then you probably rank in this area. You are completely unable to understand verb tenses, your vocabulary is limited to words containing four letters or less, and you haven't understood half of the words in this sentence alone.

2. Rod Allen: You are sufficient in occasionally stringing together sentences of a coherent nature, but struggle with the content of what you say. You often use abbreviations that nobody understands (ex: Ain't no stoppin' this D-train now.) and are probably oblivious of your nebulous phrasing (ex: If he keeps hitting like that, he's going to put up a lot of steaks. And by steaks, I mean ribeyes. And by ribeyes, I mean RBIs. [Source: Tom Keller, MLB.com]). People are often mildly entertained by your ineptitude, which prevent you from learning the difference between "was" and "were."

3. Chad Kroeger: Your sentences typically are overly cliche, and as a result, has no meaningful value. You like to think that your verbal capabilities are bolstered by speaking about the harsh aspects of life (love, death, being a rockstar with a front door key to the Playboy Mansion). Stereotypes that often fall into this category include prog rockers, valley girls, dumb blondes, those obsessed by celebrity gossip, and anyone that listens to Nickelback.

4. Rosie O'Donnell: You often offer semi-thought out irrational arguments and defamations of people who are smarter than you. You typically talk and nobody listens to your coherent drivel. Consider yourself a near-English master that nobody gives a shit about.

5. Chris Berman: Everything in your vocabulary has a nickname. There's no such thing as a simple pronoun (see: Jake "Daylight Comes and You've Got To" Delhomme and T.J. "You Say Houshmanzadeh, I Say T.J." Houshmanzadah). Many of your attempted words come out as meaningless beat-box-like sounds coming from an fat, aging television personality. Much like the Rosie O'Donnell ranking, except with a little Hebrew and fewer cow noises.

6. Yoda: You pontificate brilliance on a persistent basis, but your sentence structure hinders your effectiveness. Also, you most likely are small, green, and have pointy ears. Elves, the Jolly Green Giant's children, and midgets dipped in green paint can fall into this category.

7. A master of the English language: As long as you don't fit into one of the above categories and you can distinguish the difference between "it's" and "its," then congratulations, you're a master of the English language.

But still, let me do all the writing.

1 comment:

TK said...

Another Rod-ism I've picked up (although this one is commonly used by other broadcasters, as well): The delayed subject. This is when someone starts a sentence with a generic pronoun, then decides that people won't understand who he's talking about and throws it in at the end.

Example:

"He's really thrown the ball well tonight, has Bondo."