deepundergroundpoetry.com
THEY AREN'T INFERIOR.
THEY AREN'T INFERIOR.
The days that passed attract our sighs.
They bring some tears that fill our eyes.
The folk who lived in those past days
were great at what they used to say.
They were so perfect in their deeds,
so full of wisdom and of wit.
They were so kind and full of might
and able to create that past.
We speak for long about their acts
as we have missed their lovely sight.
We don't compare with open mind
them with those who are living now.
Why don't we look at who are near
and see their goodness and their charm.
They are so great but have one fault:
they are quite close and still nearby.
BY JOSEPH ZENIEH
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
________________________________
The days that passed attract our sighs.
They bring some tears that fill our eyes.
The folk who lived in those past days
were great at what they used to say.
They were so perfect in their deeds,
so full of wisdom and of wit.
They were so kind and full of might
and able to create that past.
We speak for long about their acts
as we have missed their lovely sight.
We don't compare with open mind
them with those who are living now.
Why don't we look at who are near
and see their goodness and their charm.
They are so great but have one fault:
they are quite close and still nearby.
BY JOSEPH ZENIEH
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
________________________________
Published 7th Nov 2023
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 0
reading list entries 0
comments 5
reads 99
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
“The days that passed attract our sighs’.
Given that “passed” is the past tense form of the verb “pass” – which means “to go past something or someone or move in relation to it, him, or her”, what you do here is to raise the quesion of what it was that “the days” go by.
If you meant to speak of “long past days”, you haven’t done so.
“Why don't we look at who are near
and see their goodness and their charm”.
I don’t know. Why don’t we?
In any case, is it true that “we” never look at those who are our contemporaries? who live with us?
“They are so great but have one fault:
they are quite close and still nearby.”
Can the fact that our contemporaries are nearby be a something for which they are blameworthy
let alone the cause of why we supposedly don’t see “their goodness and their charm”?
Moreover, look at how often you engage in dull, repetitious, prosaic declamations.
were great
are so great
They were
They were
They are
they are
so perfect
so full
and full
so kind
so great
This is hardly engaging writing.
And what you write does not in any way demonstrate what your title says you are going to show, namely, that "our" contemporaries are not in any way inferior in character, wisdom, or wit to those people we knew who now because of death belong to the past.
Given that “passed” is the past tense form of the verb “pass” – which means “to go past something or someone or move in relation to it, him, or her”, what you do here is to raise the quesion of what it was that “the days” go by.
If you meant to speak of “long past days”, you haven’t done so.
“Why don't we look at who are near
and see their goodness and their charm”.
I don’t know. Why don’t we?
In any case, is it true that “we” never look at those who are our contemporaries? who live with us?
“They are so great but have one fault:
they are quite close and still nearby.”
Can the fact that our contemporaries are nearby be a something for which they are blameworthy
let alone the cause of why we supposedly don’t see “their goodness and their charm”?
Moreover, look at how often you engage in dull, repetitious, prosaic declamations.
were great
are so great
They were
They were
They are
they are
so perfect
so full
and full
so kind
so great
This is hardly engaging writing.
And what you write does not in any way demonstrate what your title says you are going to show, namely, that "our" contemporaries are not in any way inferior in character, wisdom, or wit to those people we knew who now because of death belong to the past.
12th Nov 2023 12:14pm
Very dear Baldwin,
1- l am very surprised by what you have written about, "PASSED". Please look it up in Oxford, or Webster, or in any other dictionary.
2- About your other criticism, it's not worth wasting my time to answer. Sorry, Baldwin.
1- l am very surprised by what you have written about, "PASSED". Please look it up in Oxford, or Webster, or in any other dictionary.
2- About your other criticism, it's not worth wasting my time to answer. Sorry, Baldwin.
"1- l am very surprised by what you have written about, "PASSED". "
Why would you be surprised?
"Please look it up in Oxford, or Webster, or in any other dictionary."
I did look it up --- notably before I wrote to you. In fact, what I noted above about the meaning of the verb was taken from Webster's.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pass
Perhaps you'll show me how what is noted about both the present and the past form of the verb in the Oxford dictionary to wit:
"pass, v. transitive. To go by, past, or beyond; to leave behind or on one side as one goes ",
"passed, in pass, v. transitive. To go by, past, or beyond; to leave behind or on one side as one goes".
https://www.oed.com/search/dictionary/?scope=Entries&q=pass
contradicts what I said.
Here's a link to the entry in the Oxford Learners Dictionary:
https://tinyurl.com/5n8ex6dk
which supports what I have noted the verb means:
As does the entry on "pass" in Longman:
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/pass
So once again you show that your grasp of English and how to use it correctly to say what you mean to say is deficient.
"About your other criticism, it's not worth wasting my time to answer. "
I note that this is what you say when you know you can't refute my criticisms -- which you know are valid. And how would showing that I am wrong in what I say (assuming you'd be able to do it) be a waste of your time?
Why would you be surprised?
"Please look it up in Oxford, or Webster, or in any other dictionary."
I did look it up --- notably before I wrote to you. In fact, what I noted above about the meaning of the verb was taken from Webster's.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pass
Perhaps you'll show me how what is noted about both the present and the past form of the verb in the Oxford dictionary to wit:
"pass, v. transitive. To go by, past, or beyond; to leave behind or on one side as one goes ",
"passed, in pass, v. transitive. To go by, past, or beyond; to leave behind or on one side as one goes".
https://www.oed.com/search/dictionary/?scope=Entries&q=pass
contradicts what I said.
Here's a link to the entry in the Oxford Learners Dictionary:
https://tinyurl.com/5n8ex6dk
which supports what I have noted the verb means:
As does the entry on "pass" in Longman:
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/pass
So once again you show that your grasp of English and how to use it correctly to say what you mean to say is deficient.
"About your other criticism, it's not worth wasting my time to answer. "
I note that this is what you say when you know you can't refute my criticisms -- which you know are valid. And how would showing that I am wrong in what I say (assuming you'd be able to do it) be a waste of your time?
12th Nov 2023 7:03pm
Very dear Baldwin,
According to, Oxford Advanced Dictionary of Current English, PASS: is [VP2A/C] Such verbs are called complete intransitive verbs. Adjuncts are possible but not essential. You will understand the rest.J.Z.
According to, Oxford Advanced Dictionary of Current English, PASS: is [VP2A/C] Such verbs are called complete intransitive verbs. Adjuncts are possible but not essential. You will understand the rest.J.Z.
"According to , [SIC no comma] Oxford [SIC the Oxford] Advanced Dictionary of Current English, PASS: is [VP2A/C] [sic VP2A,C]"
So what?
"Such verbs are called complete intransitive verbs."
Did you mean "intransitive complete verbs"?
"Adjuncts are possible but not essential"
.
Not essential for what?
Please post the full entry on "pass" from this dictionary so that we can see which of the 19 senses of the verb "pass" that are noted there is being designated as such. [Note to readers: J-Z will find some excuse not to do this because he knows that contrary to what he asserts the OADCE does not label all of the meanings that it notes the verb "pass" has as VP2A/C] [SIC VP2A,C].
BTW, An intransitive complete verb is a type of verb that does action but no one or thing receives the action of the verb
https://tinyurl.com/ywpa95rm
But is it not the case that you note that something (days) **does** receive the action of the verb" pass"?
.
So what?
"Such verbs are called complete intransitive verbs."
Did you mean "intransitive complete verbs"?
"Adjuncts are possible but not essential"
.
Not essential for what?
Please post the full entry on "pass" from this dictionary so that we can see which of the 19 senses of the verb "pass" that are noted there is being designated as such. [Note to readers: J-Z will find some excuse not to do this because he knows that contrary to what he asserts the OADCE does not label all of the meanings that it notes the verb "pass" has as VP2A/C] [SIC VP2A,C].
BTW, An intransitive complete verb is a type of verb that does action but no one or thing receives the action of the verb
https://tinyurl.com/ywpa95rm
But is it not the case that you note that something (days) **does** receive the action of the verb" pass"?
.
