Your Words

You have a songstress on your hands.  I like this.

Thank you.  But I'd be grateful if you could be more specific about how and why you found my piece to be "likeable".  After all,  I post to receive articulated criticism/responses, not what is essentially saying "yea!".

I stopped by, read it, liked the idea of what I read, commented that it reminds me of a songstress.  I did not like your choice of words, I didn't like the structure, I did like the message I picked up.

Would you be kind enough to say why you found my choice of words and the structure of my piece less than likeable?   What faults do you think these things possess?

I don't consider myself a poet or heavy into this artform so I'm not the best person to get a critique from.  I just wanted to share that I liked your message and that was it.  I would remove
When will you say,
not think,
but say
so I can hear
I would leave the rest.  That's it man, that's all I have for you.

1- You want her words. You wait for them like tailed kites. What is the relationship between an impatient person waiting for her words, which we don't know why waiting for them, and the tailed kites? The tailed kites are looked at when you don't have anything to do, or we have a lot of free time not impatient.
2. That person's words are like the fireflies. What can you use fireflies for? I would like to get rid of the fireflies.
3-The words are like the quickened air. What's the relationship between the quickened air, the fireflies, and the kite? For me the writer is forcing out images which don't fit, and give the impression of false feeling.

What kind of English is    
    
"which we don't know why waiting for them, "?    
  
Did you mean to write  "which we don't know why that person is waiting for them,"?    
   
Answer that, and then I'll reply to your other questions, which seem to be grounded in a failure to understand what I wrote  that is due not only to a misreading of what I wrote  (I'm not the one who says --or is asked to say -- "I want them sailing like tailed kites to me! "),  but to a lack on your part of poetic imagination.

I'm wondering whether anyone who has read my submission thinks this response  from J-Z is (a) poorly worded, (b) involves misreading  what I wrote, and (c) makes any sense.

Please reply.

"1- You want her words. You wait for them like tailed kites."

No.  What the speaker is saying is that he wants the woman he is speaking to want HIS words and to say that she waits for them to fly to her.

So once again you have not only misread what I wrote but have tried to put words in my mouth so that you can score some points against me.

Don't you know, Baldwin, that we can change a clause into a phrase? Moreover, l would like to ask you if you know what kind of clause this is? Don't you see that this phrase should be read in its context?

"Don't you know, Baldwin, that we can change a clause into a phrase? Moreover, l would like to ask you if you know what kind of clause this is? Don't you see that this phrase should be read in its context?"

I know all of this.  But it still doesn't change the fact that  you've produced a solecism.

What is the solecism you are talking about?

Sorry, but if you can't see it in your "which" clause, then your grasp of  what it takes for  both restrictive and non restrictive relative clauses  to make grammatical sense and not be a solecism is defective.  

Again you prove that you don't know grammar. WHICH or THAT can be used with the DEFINING, but THAT can't be used with the NON DEFINING. If you don't know, Baldwin, check your information. Don't give a chance to people to blame you.

"Again you prove that you don't know grammar. WHICH or THAT can be used with the DEFINING, but THAT can't be used with the NON DEFINING."

Who said it could?  And shouldn't you have written "can be used with the defining clause"?