edit for grammar!

Oh yes, it’s true; the super grammarian has edited the previous post.  Not only was it a bit on the self-indulgent side, the grammar was inexcusable!!  That, dear reader, has been rectified.  And speaking of grammar, as I am wont to do, check this out:  http://www.signals.com/signals/T-Shirts-Sweatshirts_1GA/Item_I-Am-The-Grammarian-Shirts_HF6961G_ps_cti-1GA.html    (sorry; I tried to paste the link and no amount of fiddling would make it work)  I must own this t-shirt!! he HE!  I also pose to you all (particularly you, Steph) the question that has apparently elevated my status from the super-grammarian to haupt-grammarian (I believe that was it).  So says and so has bequeathed the Uber-grammarian.  See if you too deserve an elevated status:  Can you have a sentence that has both a predicate nominative and a predicate adjective as well as a direct object and indirect object with action coming from the same subject as the antecedent of the predicate nominative and predicate adjective? ie, no dependent clauses?   I confess, although this has apparently accorded me the accolade mentioned, I have not been able to answer it except in the negative.  So I guess I don’t deserve the title, although I’m more than willing to pass off your efforts as my own and even though the Uber himself reads this blog, he’ll never know I didn’t figure it out!

The bigger question is, why the heck am I sitting here talking about this and trying to stay awake at only 8.30 on a Friday night?