# senryu 39



## ahmetax (Sep 25, 2014)

in huge africa
there's lots of starving people --
say, what about here?

koca afrika
yine aç insanlar var
ya burda yok mu?

ahmet aksoy


----------



## Elvenswordsman (Sep 25, 2014)

Your grammar is missing a bit. "There are lots of" instead of your current line.

Thanks for sharing!


----------



## ahmetax (Sep 27, 2014)

Elvenswordsman said:


> Your grammar is missing a bit. "There are lots of" instead of your current line.
> 
> Thanks for sharing!



You are right, Elven! 
Thank you for your warning.
I can change my line :

there are lots of starving people --  (but it counts 8 syllables)

there are lots of starving men --  (is it possible to use "men" instead of "people" with the same meaning?)

Thank you very much.


----------



## Peeety1241 (Sep 27, 2014)

You can't really use men in the same way as people for this. What about saying;  many people are starving. ?


----------



## ahmetax (Sep 27, 2014)

Peeety1241 said:


> You can't really use men in the same way as people for this. What about saying;  many people are starving. ?


Yes, that sounds good.
Thank you Peeety!

in huge africa
lots of people are starving
say, what about here?

What about that? Is it possible to say "lots of people" ?


----------



## Peeety1241 (Sep 30, 2014)

Yes " lots of people are starving" sounds just fine


----------



## kaminoshiyo (Sep 30, 2014)

ahmetax said:


> In huge africa
> lots of people are starving
> say, what about here?



Good question and the question echoes at the end. I actually think this is really good despite its brevity. It says so much with so little. 

Just capitalize the first word and Africa, and maybe a punctuation mark after starving- like an elipsis (...)


----------



## ahmetax (Oct 1, 2014)

Peeety1241 said:


> Yes " lots of people are starving" sounds just fine


----------



## ahmetax (Oct 1, 2014)

kaminoshiyo said:


> Good question and the question echoes at the end. I actually think this is really good despite its brevity. It says so much with so little.
> 
> Just capitalize the first word and Africa, and maybe a punctuation mark after starving- like an elipsis (...)



Lack of capitalization is my own choice. However, there should be two dashes at the end of the second line. 
Thank you for your suggestions. I am glad that you liked my lines.


----------



## wainscottbl (Oct 1, 2014)

Peeety1241 said:


> You can't really use men in the same way as people for this. What about saying;  many people are starving. ?



I agree. I do not think it is a matter of satisfying the feminists but because "men" cannot accurately be used here because it is more humane than human what you speak about. If I said: "Man was created to eat," then I would be fine using man for the human race. But here you are speaking of something that I think requires "people"

Otherwise good poem.


----------



## wainscottbl (Oct 1, 2014)

Oh, you did change it. Sorry. Oh "There's lots of starving people" means "There is lots of starving people". It should be "They're". And "lots" is a bit too, um, colloquial for lack of a better term. I do not know if English is your first language but "lots" in the way you use it is the word that would be used by someone very young. I do not mean that to sound offensive. I suggest: "They're many starving people"


----------



## ahmetax (Oct 2, 2014)

wainscottbl said:


> Oh, you did change it. Sorry. Oh "There's lots of starving people" means "There is lots of starving people". It should be "They're". And "lots" is a bit too, um, colloquial for lack of a better term. I do not know if English is your first language but "lots" in the way you use it is the word that would be used by someone very young. I do not mean that to sound offensive. I suggest: "They're many starving people"


Hi wainscottbl,
English is not my native language. So, sometimes it is very difficult for me to feel the linguistic problems.
Your suggestion looks nice.
Anyway, are there any problems in these lines?

in huge africa
lots of people are starving --
say, what about here?


----------



## wainscottbl (Oct 2, 2014)

ahmetax said:


> Yes, that sounds good.
> Thank you Peeety!
> 
> in huge africa
> ...



I suggest "many people are starving" It's still seven syllables. Also I want to say "great" for huge but I'd like someone else to say if they think that works. It does mean huge, but it can also be taken to mean strength or power like Alexander the Great or Catherine the Great. Not that Africa is not great, but since you are referring to size I am not sure if "great Africa" would work. "Huge" takes away from the spirit of the poem to me. It's sort of like the word "awesome" which has been so used in colloquial parlance that it can even not be the best word to use to describe God. To me your poem deals with a loft and noble subject and "huge" lacks a certain nobility. "Great" works better, but it might not have the best connotation here. Thoughts other posters?


----------



## Blade (Oct 3, 2014)

wainscottbl said:


> I suggest "many people are starving" It's still seven syllables. Also I want to say "great" for huge but I'd like someone else to say if they think that works. It does mean huge, but it can also be taken to mean strength or power like Alexander the Great or Catherine the Great. Not that Africa is not great, but since you are referring to size I am not sure if "great Africa" would work. "Huge" takes away from the spirit of the poem to me. It's sort of like the word "awesome" which has been so used in colloquial parlance that it can even not be the best word to use to describe God. To me your poem deals with a loft and noble subject and "huge" lacks a certain nobility. "Great" works better, but it might not have the best connotation here. Thoughts other posters?



I would agree that both 'great' and 'huge' are inadequate. Since the concept to be illustrated here is one of extensive land area I think 'In vast Africa' would work better as the word 'vast' is more specific to the concept.

I also think 'Africa' is a proper noun and must have a capital 'A'. The word looks naked without it.:distress:


----------



## wainscottbl (Oct 3, 2014)

Yeah, vast works _great_! Or greatly....no it's well. It works well. That's on of those sometimes forgotten English differences between "well" and "good". Like in Shawshank Redemption. "I don't read so good." "You don't read well; you don't read so well." "What?" "We'll get to that later." But vast works greatly! :stung:


----------



## wainscottbl (Oct 3, 2014)

And yes proper nouns much have a capital letter.


----------



## ahmetax (Oct 3, 2014)

Blade said:


> I would agree that both 'great' and 'huge' are inadequate. Since the concept to be illustrated here is one of extensive land area I think 'In vast Africa' would work better as the word 'vast' is more specific to the concept.
> 
> I also think 'Africa' is a proper noun and must have a capital 'A'. The word looks naked without it.:distress:



I agree with 'vast'. It gives me a feeling of emptiness, loneliness, and endless dimensions...

in vast Africa
many people are starving --
say, what about here?


----------

