Talk:Hokku

respectively

In the sentence "a hokku is 17 Japanese syllables (onji - a phonetic unit identical to a mora) in length, composed of three metrical units of 5, 7 and 5 syllables respectively", the word 'respectively' is not used incorrectly:

• Wordnet: in the order given; "the brothers were called Felix and Max, respectively"
• Dictionary.com: in precisely the order given; sequentially.
• Quotes in Websters:
  • let each man respectively perform his duty.
  • The impressions from the objects or the senses do mingle respectively every one with its kind. --Bacon.
    --Yumegusa (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Syllables

I was about to have a crack at "17 syllables" but then noticed that it actually says "17 Japanese syllables". Hmm.. what do we think? Is a "Japanese syllable" the same as an on/mora/kana/moji, as distinct from an "English syllable", which certainly isn't? Tesspub (talk) 16:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Evidently that is the intention, but I think the term "Japanese syllables" is just confusing. I've edited accordingly. --Yumegusa (talk) 17:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Hokku was the part of Waka

Hokku is the old Japanese like thou, thee, thyself, thy are the old English! I changed the verb -to be in its past form to indicate it

Still there is the question about Where did you find evidences that Word　Hokku exists in the separated from Waka form Are there references in the article about Haiku in Japanese

Haikago (talk) 09:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Form

Typically, a hokku was 17 moras (or onji) in length, composed of three metrical units of 5, 7 and 5 moras respectively. Alone among the verses of a poem, the hokku included a kireji or 'cutting-word' which appears at the end of one of its three metrical units. Like all of the other stanzas, a Japanese hokku was traditionally written in a single vertical line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haikago (talk • contribs) 09:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC) Haiku -yes Hokku was the part of WAKAHaikago (talk) 10:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I have reverted your edit from present to past tense. Hokku is the first verse of a renku, and renku continue to be written today, in Japanese and other languages (see, for example, http://www.simplyhaiku.com/SHv4n4/renku/springtime_jp.html ). Regarding your comments here about waka, I suggest you make any edits necessary, but please supply references. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Form

According to Ueda Makoto （ Ueda Makoto, 5/20/1931-）,'s Japan literature researcher in Japan literature professor at Stanford University. Born in Hyogo Prefecture. Washington University Ph.d. 1962. University of Toronto Professor and later Professor at Stanford University. Specialize in Japan's poetry, especially have many books about haiku, senryu and tanka. Comparative literature at Ph... D... get (1962). Basho was not writer of Hokku He was writer of Haiku I change Hokku to Haiku Hokku was used earlier as a part of WAKA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haikago (talk • contribs) 10:11, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

No. This article is about hokku, not haiku. I am familiar with Ueda's work. Where exactly does he assert that "Basho was not writer of Hokku", as you claim? The term 'haiku' was applied to hokku by Shiki more than 200 years after Basho died, so your edit appears to be nonsensical. In addition, the verse in question was written explicitly as the first verse of a kasen renku. Such an opening verse has never been called 'haiku'. Please substantiate support your edits with references to reliable sources, and discuss any counter-intuitive edits here before editing, in order to arrive at consensus. Thanks. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 10:20, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Article in Japanese names Basho as a writer of haiku

Hi died 1694年11月28日 If this article about Hokku 1Please explain that Hokku is the OLD JAPANESE 2Prove that Hokku was exist wide country of Japan and was popular in the same scale as a HAIKU and was known by people as Haiku known. Where exactly does he assert that "Basho was writer of Hokku", as YOU claim? Where exactly does he assert that The term 'haiku' was applied to hokku by Shiki more than 200 years after Basho died,as YOU claim? You say that Basho is the writer of Hokku but in Japan Basho is well known writer of Haiku. Are ther any references for hokku in Japanese language or evidences of its existence and separated from WAKA poem!

In addition, the verse in question was written explicitly as the first verse of a kasen renku. Such an opening verse has never been called 'haiku'

Probably the dead  Imperors and their court poets are happy that You and other authors are spoiling HAIKU.

Basho is a Professional haikai master says in Wikipedia in Japanese. Matsuo Basho （ Matsuo ばしょう, 0/1644 (1644)-10/12/1694 （ 11/28/1694 ）NOT his real name! There is a version that he was ninjya and had to change his name! By the way Bashouu means place in Japanese ）, haikai master of the early Edo period. A person who said about wind as about ART He wrote- My father died when I was 13, my brother took the house and soon I believed that life is painful thing. For young Basho there was nothing else than servant job.

IN (1672)He wrote the first collection of poems at the Shrine at Ueno Tenman-gū (IGA city, Mie Prefecture). He began to write Haiku in (1678),  in the time of Edo period. After his boss and samurai died in 1666, He moved to the another city and worked on the construction of the Kanda water supply,and only after what he became a professional haikai master.

HE was a great at speed walking. 45-year-old Basho" (reached the pick of mountain!) (2,400 km), yamaya 跋渉 and once he visited a dozen towns in the same day. At that age at the time that was a great record. That is why Basho is called Ninja]. Once he spent just 1 night for the trip of usual 13 nights just to visit the Sendai clan and praised by one phrase 詠まず . So You can see that in Japanese article about Basho is written that HE WAS HAIKAI and used to write Haiku.

Haikago (talk) 14:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Haikago, I am sorry but I find it very difficult to follow and understand your comments above. I think if you keep them succinct and relevant it will be easier to have a discussion. Let's keep in mind that this page is solely for discussion of improving this Hokku article. Looking at your points one by one:

• 1Please explain that Hokku is the OLD JAPANESE
  • Sorry, I don't understand

sorry Of course You dont understand I dont understand You too. Should we understand each other or what should we do Just come here in Japan and say HOKKU. No one will UNDERSTAND YOU!!!!!

• 2Prove that Hokku was popular in the same scale as a HAIKU
  • The article makes no such claim

OK why article HOKKU was written Why There is not such a word in Japanese. It is considered old Japanese language.

• Where exactly does he assert that "Basho was writer of Hokku", as YOU claim?
  • Bashō and his interpreters: selected hokku with commentary by Makoto Ueda (poetry critic)
• Where exactly does he assert that The term 'haiku' was applied to hokku by Shiki more than 200 years after Basho died,as YOU claim?
  • The haiku handbook, by William J. Higginson page 20

IN the references there is no word of HOKKU but HAIKU! Thanks for answering

Understanding is essencial for the WIKIPEDIA writers. Haikago (talk) 15:13, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Please also refer to the references already cited in the article. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 14:41, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

All the references from above the written in English perfect books about Haiku refer Hokku as the old name for the first lines of the WAKA Shortly Haiku coudnt be name as Hokku and Basho couldnt be named as a writer of Hokku instead of Haiku. Thanks for answering Understanding is importantHaikago (talk) 15:20, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Haikago, for the sake of clarity, please do not edit your comments after someone has replied to them, as you did here. (See the guideline at WP:REDACTED). Secondly, it is now very difficult to see who wrote what in the text immediately above here, because of the varied indentations. Please reply in a separate post below mine, instead of in-between. Do you still feel that some changes need to be made in the article? If so, please explain below, with your reasons. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 15:29, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Haiku as the notion is correct Hokku is not correct and should be out of using Because it is out of use in Japan

Secondly, it is now very difficult to see who wrote what in the text immediately above here, because of the varied indentations

It is easy to understand by whom the text above here was written because of its signatures.

The target (not feeling) of my writing is the clarity of the notion -Haiku, its history. It is also interesting to find out why Wikipedians reluctantly refuses from any revisions, searching of mistakes in its views and doing necessary changes. Thanks for answering. 121.116.92.174 (talk) 07:06, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Basho composed HAIKU

IN Japanese culture, Matsuo Basho (not his real name),who was a ninjya from samurai family according to thearticle in Japanese in Wikipedia, was named in the article is a writer of Haiku not Hokku and haijin not hokujin. Basho composed Haiku not Hokku, although Haikuas name for that poems of Basho, was created in 19 century. Persistence in reaching of clarity concern Haikubased on reaction of Japanese teachers on the word HOKKU.Karate 07:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haikago (talk • contribs)

The edit you made here is unconstructive. If you would read Haruo Shirane, Traces of Dreams, Stanford University Press, 1998, ISBN 0-8047-3099-7, pp.161-163, as cited in the article, you will see that the verse in question is a hokku, not a haiku. It was the first verse of a kasen renku. Please desist from repeatedly altering referenced information to reflect your own non-WP:NPOV. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 10:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Please desist from repeatedly altering referenced information to reflect your own non-

Please desist from repeatedly altering referenced information to reflect your own non- Stop writing in bad English the article about litrature of Japan and read the article about Bashou in Wikipedia in Japanese language. Karate 05:13, 25 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haikago (talk • contribs)

Haruo Shirane, Traces of Dreams, Stanford University Press, 1998, ISBN 0-8047-3099-7, pp.161-163

The advertising of the books that are not yet in Wikipedia, is probably OK and Jimmy Wales created Wikipedia for those target, perhaps, (I will ask him!) but for me, reading of the articles in Japanese Wikipedia, devoted to Haiku, Haikai and Basho is STRONG ENOUGH and very informative.Karate 05:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

http://www.amazon.com/Traces-Dreams-Landscape-Cultural-Memory/dp/0804730997/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224540820&sr=1-2

Basho (1644-94) is perhaps the best known Japanese poet in both Japan and the West, and yet there has been remarkably little serious scholarship in English on his achievement.  Traces of Dreams examines the issues of language, landscape, cultural memory, and social practice in early modern Japan through a fundamental reassessment of haikai—popular linked verse that eventually gave birth to modern haiku—particularly that of Basho and his disciples.

As you can see professor Shirine san didnt say that Basho was a writer of HOKKU because Basho was well known as a Haijin and used to write the short poems and he himself never wrote in the title to his poem this is HOKKU. To name haiku by hokku, It is the same as to name WWI as the Great War, after WWII happened. ........Although I found Your remarks insulting, the greatest gifts one generation can give to another is the wisdom, take my respect Karate 06:07, 25 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haikago (talk • contribs)

Haikago, you have been warned on your Talk page, as follows:

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Hokku, you may be blocked from editing. gråb whåt you cån (talk) 09:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

The use of the term hokku in English is fully referenced to reliable sources, and I have even gone to the trouble of pointing you at specific instances. Your continued disruptive editing, most recently here, amounts to Wikipedia:Vandalism. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 09:49, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

== naming vandal for the good faith -doing harm to Wikipedia == Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Wikipedia's role as an encyclopedia of existing recognized knowledge. The existing recognized knowledge about Basho, that he was a writer of Haiku. Hokku is not the existing recognized knowledge about Haiku and Basho. Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view). To write about Basho as a writer of Hokku, when he is known in Japan as a writer of Haiku, to create article about Hokku when Shika perfectly explained that it was Haiku, what is this --Karate 12:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm really not prepared to waste any more time on this pointless discussion. Haruo Shirane is Shincho Professor of Japanese Literature at Columbia University. He is a highly-respected and recognised scholar in his field. As referenced in the article (and as repeated above), he supports the use of the term 'hokku'. The title of the book by Makoto Ueda (whom you say you recognise as an authority), Bashō and his interpreters: selected hokku with commentary (also mentioned above), clearly supports the use of the term. Your appeal to another Wikipedia page for support of your viewpoint is irrelevant, Wikipedia cannot cite itself as a source. Unless you can quote from a reliable source that Basho "did not write hokku" then your contention has no place here. If you continue to edit in contravention to Wikipedia policies, you will be blocked. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2012 (UTC)