{"id":44741114,"user":"xoxxala","time":1753921713,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

I had no idea what a garden path sentence was, too, but wiki to the rescue:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence","comments":[{"id":44741404,"user":"oatsandsugar","time":1753924599,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

The old man the boat","comments":[{"id":44741451,"user":"sshine","time":1753925115,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

Time flies like an arrow,

fruit flies like a banana.","comments":[],"comments_count":0,"level":1,"url":"item?id=44741451"},{"id":44742331,"user":"chutes","time":1753936471,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

The horse raced past the barn fell","comments":[{"id":44743757,"user":"alt227","time":1753952492,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

I still have never managed to understand that one properly","comments":[{"id":44743841,"user":"cpach","time":1753953541,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

I think it shall be interpreted like this: The creature who fell was the horse (that was previously raced past the barn). I.e. it was not the barn that fell.","comments":[{"id":44743900,"user":"alt227","time":1753954171,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

Thankyou that makes sense!

So in reality this is just an incorrect sentence.\nIt should be written as

"The horse that raced past the barn fell"","comments":[{"id":44744125,"user":"sshine","time":1753956724,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

It should be.

But it’s not incorrect to say

  The tree grown tall is the one I planted\n\n  The horse raced past had somewhere to go\n

\nBut when you don’t end the subject syntagma in an obvious way, you make it difficult to read.

It’s easier to read

  The tree grown tall last year withered\n

\nbecause grown has a distinct past particle form. The past particle of raced is raced, which means you need more lookahead to determine its role in the sentence.

You can artificially push out the point at which the sentence disambiguates between whether the word is past tense or past particle, and make it seem that it’s probably past tense until it can’t be.

You could say that the sentence is LL(k) for an unintuitively high k.","comments":[],"comments_count":0,"level":5,"url":"item?id=44744125"},{"id":44744053,"user":"cpach","time":1753955919,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

It’s ambigous, but is it incorrect?","comments":[{"id":44744106,"user":"alt227","time":1753956533,"time_ago":"6 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

If language is constantly changing due to how people use it rather than sticking to a strict set of rules, then in my opinion gramatically correct sentences should always be explicit and never ambiguous.","comments":[],"comments_count":0,"level":6,"url":"item?id=44744106"}],"comments_count":1,"level":5,"url":"item?id=44744053"}],"comments_count":3,"level":4,"url":"item?id=44743900"}],"comments_count":4,"level":3,"url":"item?id=44743841"}],"comments_count":5,"level":2,"url":"item?id=44743757"}],"comments_count":6,"level":1,"url":"item?id=44742331"}],"comments_count":8,"level":0,"url":"item?id=44741404"}],"comments_count":9,"url":"item?id=44741114"}

Comment by xoxxala