...the meaning of the term "language poetry" may vary depending... would fix
the problem. Calling it a 'term' and then a 'label' is unnecessarily prolix,
eh?
P
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Poetryetc provides a venue for a dialogue relating to
> poetry and poetics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Kasper
> Sent: 05 September 2006 11:07
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: that's relative
>
> haha. looks like whoever wrote it suffers from confusion as
> to the word 'who' being used for something other than a
> person. but I can't imagine anything but "whose" being
> acceptable in (even academic) language. ;) I'm not american tho. (!)
>
> K S
>
> On 05/09/06, MJ Walker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Perhaps Americans on the list can enlighten me about the following:
> > looking online for commentary on Ashbery's *Three Poems* I
> found the
> > following, said to be a report for a "Kelly Writers House Fellows
> > Seminar": >> In George Hartley's Textual Politics and
> Language Poets,
> > he makes clear that the term "Language poetry" is a label that's
> > meaning may vary depending on who is defining it.<< Is there now a
> > possessive relative pronoun/adjective "that's" in the
> accepted (even
> > academic) American version/s of the language? This was published in
> > 2002 and is still there, so nobody seems to have taken
> exception to it.
> > Yours Puzzled of Ewell
> > --
> >
> > One must be prepared for a piece of music which is laden
> with symbols: bells, Poltergeist knocks and grotesque figues.
> Kasper Rofelt.
> >
>
|