Is this grammatically correct? What does it mean? Any possible rephrasing? You don’t compare noodles to rice grains. Rice is a hard grain, exposing it doesn’t really affect it. Noodles are made out from flour, and exposing it makes it damp… that’s my p

Yes, your text is grammatically correct. It’s an analogy suggesting that two different things (noodles and rice) are not directly comparable due to their distinct characteristics. Here's a breakdown of the meaning: - **"You don’t compare noodles to rice grains."** - This suggests that noodles and rice are so different that comparing them is not meaningful. - **"Rice is a hard grain, exposing it doesn’t really affect it."** - Rice can withstand exposure without significant change; it remains hard when exposed. - **"Noodles are made out from flour, and exposing it makes it damp."** - Noodles, being softer and made from flour, become soggy when exposed to moisture. - **"that’s my point."** - This emphasizes the main argument about the differences between the two. - **"Any yeah, I agree with you that noodles generally aren’t healthy."** - Acknowledgment of the other person’s opinion that noodles are not a healthy choice. Here’s a possible rephrasing for clarity and flow: "You can’t really compare noodles and rice grains. Rice is a hard grain that remains relatively unchanged when exposed, while noodles, made from flour, become damp and soggy when exposed to moisture. That’s the main point I’m trying to make. And yes, I agree with you—noodles are generally not the healthiest option."