08-29-2013, 04:03 AM
(08-29-2013, 03:16 AM)btrudo Wrote: brightly is not necessarily correct - rage in this case is what is called a linking verb - essentially a glorified form of the verb "to be".Hi bt,
the fire burned red
the sun shone yellow
etc . . .
Poets can decide upon such usage, but it's not considered acceptable grammar. Not that I care much about the rules of grammar, but they exist and change. As for glorified "to be", 'rage' in the poem doesn't read like an is. There is are differences between rage brightly and rage bright, and I believe that I already discussed my take on that. I have no problem with "rage bright", but I want did want to offer my different reads on the word choice.
If you want as an is, why didn't the poem say:
who chose the bright suns we hoped would rage forever
The little choices do give different connotations.
If you're just doing it to make the meter tidy, is that good enough of a reason?
You are wrong, though, on the scarify thing. This is only the second time I have used it in print in 50 years, though it is part of my spoken lexicon.
Well, I've read two poems by you and it's in both, so what am I supposed to think? So it's your pet word for the week.
It's not part of my lexicon and I can't recall seeing it anywhere. No problem with that...new word entry: scarify. The lexicon can be a messy matter (perhaps impossible to resolve) when you start considering all the different locales where English is spoken and written. If it's the right word, go with it, but at the same time, "scarifies" wasn't in the original, so why did you change?
A little workshop adage is if a word keeps popping up, it may be asking you to write a poem about it.
If you want to see more instances of poems where scarify is not, read all but the two where it is...dear Liza
Very best,
tectak