PostPoems Be Artistic. Be Creative. Be Inspired!

Reedited on 07.16.2019 (misspelled 1.  "imagintation" v. "imagination" & 2. "of much greater interest to me" v. "of a much greater interest to me" in this Author's Notes/Comments); 07.02.2019 (inclusion of the additional term "Political Philosophy" among the list of cognate subjects, for clarification of both its grammatical & semantical errors, which can be both a technical &/or a philosophical issue):

This poem is a Filipino/Tagalog poem, composed in a particular way (or form).   A far different poetical form, &/or composition—which is of a Japanese haiku (with seventeen syllables), but using a native language (my native language of Filipino/Tagalog—["taga-ilog"]), I was merely examining the subconscious aspects of meaning (with a seeming specialism on meaning-making and sense-making).  That exercise is subjective & should also be empirically related (through experience/experiential) as it emerges from those agencies of my own subjective imagination/observation (otherwise stated numerous times in my past author's notes/comments section).  Specifically making such a uniquely described poem was, again, a form of my practice/exercise, in the hopes of understanding haikus/tankas deeply (more significantly, in relation to my own studies of these manifold poetics).  Poems are generally considered art forms, so I thought that it could also be assumed (or presumed) to be synonymous with the maxim that goes..art is..the "highest form of expression" (from an "a priori" impression/knowledge which I have about it—a supposed quality of any type of an art).  That could still be debated due to art theories and art criticism.  Is it a philosophical/moral argument which still involves value judgements/moral judgements/critique?  In my own terms, and in most of my current adaptations of language, I wanted to get cues from suchlike works of mine to emphatically connote cultural influences that were (for myself) seeming to be inevitably applied (such as in many of these examples).  I believe those matters to be highly important in determining social phenomena which is why we have sociolinguistical considerations in Linguistics as an area/field of study (e.g, Logicism, Russell, & Oxford Philosophy).  The reason why I may have seemed to be constantly consumed by my own informal philosophical studies (casual self-directed ones, which also span the cognate subjects of Philosophy of Language, its so-called theories of language/perception/meaning, Linguistics & its subfields, including Political Philosophy) are the sheer evidential implications that I have gotten from Culture Theory (for my overarching Moral Philosophy studies, as part of another newer study, which was said to be emerging from the 1990s, & which is of a much greater interest to me—Intercultural Studies).  Those other underlying concepts relating to that, other than those denoted already, were cultural relativism/moral relativism/moral knowledge as interconnected with my religious studies whereby virtually every culture are purported to have their own (including cultural rights & literary developments).  The synonymy of intermingling social factors in our everyday lives (& perceived realities) and social realities (social facts that I have since been delving into, in a sociological point of view) can be making a huge part of my theme (i.e., just in order to rediscover the cultural impact of language, or its notions, and to prove how Media Culture have played a big role in anyone's worldview, e.g., depersonalization, disenchantment, disenfranchisement, defamiliarization, decentralization, dehumanization somehow).  Finally (not fatalistically), just to emphasize its presumed direct/indirect sociocultural/sociolinguistic connection to 'social identities' or one's very own political views/standpoints (without discounting the psychological facets whereof, which is also a presupposed given).  Therefore, while in that process of self-discovery (reinstated all-too-well), it is hoped to emphasize those said/implied objectives (and to avoid redundancy in the future explananda or explicantia of my poetics ).  Thank you for reading on & for your consideration.

 Reedited 07.11.2019, 07.08.2019; 07.03.2019; 07.02.2019; 06.26/27.2019 (for general grammatical &/or semantical errors, misspelled words, & ambiguities/clarifications):  

This is, indeed, just another "tanka" exercise.  Like most of the other tankas that have been published here, for the same stated purposes, they were also primarily intended for me to learn from the get-go.  That was the surface reason:  in understanding my own notions of the poetical distinctions between a tanka & a haiku (&/or/versus other poetical forms, their fundamental use as a vehicle for expression in classic/modern/postmodern literature; still considered as modes of expression anyhow despite the varying adaptations even up to now, especially in my investigations of the "indeterminacy of translation", Quine).  Nonetheless, I do not intend to make anything more out of them other than that which was stated, i.e., the didactic part of it.  It neither means anything more than that which was implicitly explained nor anything else that may possibly be assumed (assumptions that may also be expected, which might precede these developments as they get showcased or self-published).—Because it is also a learning experience, so to speak a synonymy of a learning objective, I solely wanted to learn (& relearn the essences) about how language(s) (or theories of language, in general) are distinguished in respect to its many contradistinctions/aspects/properties/use/etc., ie., descriptivism vs prescriptivism, how those [said features] interrelate to meaningfulness/meaninglessness to either myself or others, & penultimately how the Japanese, themselves, supposed to have intended their own expressions/ideas to mean—in relation to my "own" usage).  Of course, that could still mean going to back to historical accounts of their own systematized body of knowledge in its foundational knowledge (as pertains to literature & those multifarious factors that have mainly contributed to those movements (i.e., in their art forms).  I know of the basic premises..that there must exist, either metaphysically or empirically, a divide between two cultural traditions and how my poems could be considered too synthetic, by comparison.  An intellectual's pursuit (e.g., his intellectualisation about anything, or for the matter at hand) can be only deemed so (a so-called "claim", even by him); one may even seem to appear megalomaniac, because like a maxim, that's how intellectualizing may look like (e.g., that's how it may appear to work within a particular linguistic/phenomenological/logical system).  But more than this, there is still an overriding principle which is my aim, i.e., to further analyze the philosophical distinctions between them, as well (when observed through a wide-ranging lens or purview/scope which also could mean its "analyticity" in regards to theoretical analyses that span intersubjectively, e.g., trans-/inter-/multi-/cross-disciplinarity).  Pretty much how Quine have been said to have arrived at one of his theses about translation &/or his ideas on synonymy—as by having his pragmatic stance on one of those said theses (versus, in what I've studied so far, e.g., logicists/logical positivists vs. the continental philosophers' take on Linguistic Philosophy & other sociolinguistical concepts and theories which I will mention in the next instance when given a chance).  There is no definite goal to be achieved right now, but for my own self-discovery of my casual use of language by its direct/indirect applications (about effective communication/communicative action) and for enhancing my unripe understanding of the dichotomies involved in  semantics/pragmatics/syntactics/semiotics which could be one instance alone of that exercise in my daily application.  It is, in fact, a part of current curricula in Sociology & Psychology (according to one of my co-workers).  In an English-speaking world, where English is predominantly taught as primary subject matter in most learning institutions, my self-directed studies may be deemed significant by my own standard of measure due to it has given me a good start to align certain variables versus many other linguistic factors/phenomena (social phenomena) & other traditions in the Western analytic tradition (in Philosophy, as by the use of the English language or its translations from German & French or Latin/Greek for use in both Continental & Analytic Philosophy).  Howsoever, this concept that I just had formed here may be deemed insignificant by others, e.g., in another [specified] way or contrastingly. It is both a phenomenon and a noumenon (e.g., if one should go by Kant's basic descriptions of such).

Additional hashtags that were not input above are: #mediacultures, #satanicmanifestation, #indwelling, #infilling .

This is a self-directed study of Japanese "haiku" poems which I've been doing for some time now (as exampled in some of the poems listed here).  However, it was, in fact, written in another language.   This was still structured as a basic Japanese haiku of seventeen syllables, but by my current usage of Filipino/Tagalog language (yet another language group, one that is also widely used among the supposed "175" ones that are also spoken formally/informally in the Philippine archipelago), I thought that this could somehow aid in my informal studies.  I think this lets me examine the nuanced approaches to those elements in the free creation of "language" that are generally believed to be involved in the wide plethora of linguistic phenomena (as in the field of Linguistics itself).  This is only a practice poem to brush up on my Tagalog language skills & thereby learn from its subliminal, or nuanced, linguistic turn in the process (e.g., to denote its interrelation to semantics & intentionality: Kriegel, Searle, Quine, et al).  I only have tried to come up with these Filipino haikus for that sake, the stated initial purpose, but, secondarily, for my own personal applications as a firsthand experiencer.  During the last, while cross-referencing some of my notes, there are actually other Filipino haikus that were already existing (I recently have just discovered); and these were found online which also have their own particular haiku structures.  Thank you for reading on!

A poem which is formed, or structured, like a Japanese "haiku"; & that which was created using my native language of Filipino/Tagalog (i.e., coming from the Philippines/Philippine Islands).

A haiku that was inspired by one of the works of an American poet from Amherst, Massachusetts (Emily Dickinson), who is probably my most favorite poet.  Thank you for reading on!

It is still a mental note to aid in my self-directed learning about writing a haiku.  I'm a tyro (at this), it means I'm a beginner.