I think the best example, and for perfectly understandable reasons, is Bridge Over Troubled Water. Paul Simon writes two verses and choruses of masterful lyrics expressing a timeless sentiment:
*When you’re weary
Feeling small
When tears are in your eyes
I will dry them all
[etc.] *
Then Art Garfunkel and the producer tell him it needs another verse. And, thinking WTF he writes:
*Sail on Silver Girl,
Sail on by
Your time has come to shine
All your dreams are on their way
*
Well, I can’t deny that I do find the song as a whole quite charming. But I’ve always imagined Syd writing the lyrics by sitting down with an exercise book, chewing the end of his pencil thoughtfully, trying to come up with a proper end to that verse and then just going ‘Oh, bugger it, this’ll do.’
I rather like the lyrics about Gerald the homeless mouse later in the song.
I don’t see any spurious words there. Which one are you talking about? Is it “for”? If so, are you not aware that this is a perfectly acceptable construction in many dialects of English? That dialect seems to fit the mood of the song quite well.
If any fault is to be found with “A Horse With No Name”, it is the following mindless tautology:
It’s also probably not what he actually sings. There are some (including McCartney, IIRC), who claim that the lyrics are actually “…world in which we’re livin’”.
Nit-pick: It’s an “ever-changing world.”
But this one has always bugged me because he could so easily have made it “in which we’re livin’” without changing the meaning or the cadence or anything, and the grammar wouldn’t hit the ear with such a thud.
ETA: Whoops, simulpost. psychonaut may be right; those could be the actual lyrics.
Abra abracadabra
I wanna reach out and grab ya
Abra abracadabra
…
…
…
Abracadabra
I always picture Steve Miller throwing in that last “abracadabra” while just kind throwing his hands in the air for lack of coming up with anything else.