[Newspoetry] Reducing Webster to Some Plays on Words

[Donald L Emerick]

Reducing Webster to Some Plays on Words.

Some moments ago, I laughed at Reproductions:
An intimating imitation representing itself (smile)
As some copy of some more severe intimidation
That could be copied, by easy virtue, simpliciter:
In short, a reduced Shakespearean, by soliciture,
Makes me laugh out loud, improvising for awhile.

Forthwith, I forgot forethought of a Bible of Words
Known as the ultimate preachings of the prophets
As found in verses from Book of Webster chapters,
Wherein lies all of our meanings and demeanings.

The be-meaning Prophet speaks, in Chapter P,
In a verse titled Phoneme, as pronounced by him
(All true verses have their resounding names,
Yet many named sounds lack all true verse
<You will pardon, the Feast of Marginalia in me,
For I rewrite what I commonly see, in textuality>):
"1: The least unit of speech for distinguishing
One utterance from another <or any other>
In all variations of its manifestations as display
In the speaking of a single person <unwed other?>
Or as particular <non-universal> dialectics
Flowing out from unhealed-unhealable wounds
That result from immodest modifying influences
(Found in sounds and stresses of neighbors);
EG, p in pin and f in fin differ as ~ <phonemes>
Auditory hallucinogens: voices, speaking words."
So says the Prophet, by definition, speaking true,
Speaking for all of us, speaking ex cathedrally.

Chapter and Verse lend support to this believing.
In the Book of W, Chapter M, Verse Morpheme,
We find the Prophet expounding on this theme:
"1. A feature of language, relating parts to wholes,
Such parts (nouns, verbs, adjectives and <herein
Comes an oddity> concrete adverbs <affixatives,
Reduplications, prepositions, conjunctions,
Auxiliary verbs, copulative verbs <unseemly verbs>,
Intonations, accentuations <aka detonations>,
Ablaut variations or <even> some order of words) --
<Here the Prophet does the job I would try to do>
Now of little use in linguistics (cf semanteme).
2. A meaningful linguistic unit <regardless of use>,
Occurring in both free and bound forms,
With no smaller meaningful parts, subatomically.
(Free forms are ding und sich, complete in self,
As may be exampled by pin child pray load;
While bound forms would appear in the s of pins,
The hoods of every childhood, eds of prayeds,
And the duplicitous uns and ers of unloaders)."
Obviously, Prophet W sees when we but glyph.

Chapter A, Verse Allomorpheme would add,
Had the Prophet written such true verse
<One has to speculate on some omissives>:
"1. Linguistic units, designating some form,
Itself multitudinal <mutinal> representations,
Of a Morpheme, as it manifests and so appears
At diverse points in flows, streams of language.
EG, a slep of a slept, or a sleep in a sleep well,
Sleeping and sleeper awake in one Morpheme.
EG <and whyever would I need more of same>
The es of dishes breaking, like an s of dreams
Or of traps, or the swishy-tailed en of an oxen,
Or the sound shift of teeth to tooth, in truth,
Or zero suffixiation of sheep by those sheep.
<2. What more may I say than might be said?>."

Religious writings pose tough readings for us.
How do we come to believe any first part of it?
The Prophet foresaw our foreswearing doubt.
Said he, religiously, "Write notes, Son of Man,
In Book of W, in Chapter I, an Isomorpheme.
You shall need to know allegoric isomorphs
(When A and B pattern themselves as one,
CipherTextuality says FXEFRF is PZMZTP)
Or how similarity is closeness as familiarity
And also the given identity of hypothecation
By brain processing psychologic manifestation."
<I quote quite freely, here, Prophet speaking.> 

Thanks for listening.
Donald L Emerick