肥後狂句




肥後狂句（ひごきょうく）は熊本県で創作・鑑賞されている狂句の一種。


熊本のラジオや新聞では定期的に扱われ、親しまれている文芸である。



概要


一般の川柳・狂句と同じく五・七・五を定型とし、風刺や笑いと創作の基本とするが、熊本弁の話し口調で作るところが特徴である（必ずしも熊本弁特有の語彙を使う必要はない）。


また、創作の際には「笠（かさ）」と呼ばれるお題が出され、これを頭の「五」の部分に据えて残りの七・五を競作するのが通例である。


この「笠」は必ずしも五音とは限らず、時に「結婚記念日」「のさん（熊本弁で腹が立つ、呆れるの意）」など大きく音数が異なる場合もある。



関連項目




  • 薩摩狂句（鹿児島の類似文芸）


  • ばってん荒川 ぴら〜っと登場!（肥後狂句を扱ったラジオ番組）


  • ラジオおもしろ肥後狂句工房（上記の後番組）



外部リンク




  • 肥後狂句（熊本日日新聞社）


  • ラジオおもしろ肥後狂句工房（RKKラジオ）




Popular posts from this blog

Can a sorcerer learn a 5th-level spell early by creating spell slots using the Font of Magic feature?

Image
28 6 $begingroup$ Per the Font of Magic feature, sorcerer can use Flexible Casting to create 5th-level spell slots at level 7, even though they are not typically available until level 9. You can transform unexpended sorcery points into one spell slot as a bonus action on your turn. The Creating Spell Slots table shows the cost of creating a spell slot of [5th level is 7] If such a sorcerer levels up while still having this 5th-level spell slot, can they choose a 5th-level spell as the spell they gain upon levelling up? The Spellcasting feature states: Additionally, when you gain a level in this class, you can choose one of the sorcerer spells you know and replace it with another spell from the sorcerer spell list, which also must be of a level for which you have spell slots.
Read more

Does disintegrating a polymorphed enemy still kill it after the 2018 errata?

Image
up vote 13 down vote favorite 1 After the 2018 errata, the disintegrate spell description now reads: A creature targeted by this spell must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the target takes 10d6 + 40 force damage. The target is disintegrated if this damage leaves it with 0 hit points. If you were to polymorph an enemy into a rat and then disintegrate it, would the enemy be disintegrated or would it just return to its original form? I know that for Druids, it’s not an instant kill anymore, but is this the case for polymorph as well? dnd-5e spells polymorph errata share | improve this question edited 18 hours ago
Read more

A Topological Invariant for $pi_3(U(n))$

Image
3 3 $begingroup$ Recently, I saw a construction of topological invariant for $pi_3(U(n))$ with $ngeq 2$ : $$ N=frac{1}{24pi^2}int_{S^3} d^3x epsilon^{ijk} Tr[(U^{-1}partial_{x_i}U)(U^{-1}partial_{x_j}U)(U^{-1}partial_{x_k}U)] , $$ where $Uin U(n)$ depends on $boldsymbol{x}=(x_1,x_2,x_3)in S^3$ , $epsilon^{ijk}$ is the Levi-Civita symbol, $i,j,k=1,2,3$ , and the duplicated indexes are summed over. It is claimed that $N$ is an integer, but why? Update 02/02/2019 I think I got an argument for $n=2$ . In this case, $U=e^{i varphi} q$ with $qin SU(2)$ . Due to the trace and the Levi-Civita symbol in $N$ , $varphi$ does not contribute to $N$ . As $Tr[q^{dagger}partial_i q]=0$ and $(q^{dagger}partial_i q)^{dagger}=-q^{dagger}partial_i q$ , $q^{dagger}partial_i q$ in geneeral has the form $q^{dagger}partia
Read more