Finding a loophole or an inconsistency about grammar doesn’t prove that language shouldn’t make sense to at least two people. I mean did anyone ever actually say that to communicate that actual meaning? If not then its not relevant at all.

But even if someone did say that with the intent to communicate (something about bison?), language or grammar, especially as it emerges from fallible human communication is allowed to make mistakes.

That’s why we have words like “misunderstanding”. It’s also why meanings and patterns of use LITERALLY change over time. But whether misunderstood or unintelligible or encrypted it’s fundamental purpose is still to communicate.