Answer: A) After the ceasefire was declared, the soldiers were allowed to go home.
Explanation:
An independent clause is a clause that expresses a complete thought. It can stand on its own and still make sense. The independent clause in this example is "the soldiers were allowed to go home."
A subordinate clause, on the other hand, is a clause that does not express a complete thought. It cannot stand alone, because it has no meaning if not joined to an independent clause. "After the ceasefire was declared" is a subordinate clause.
All the other options contain two independent clauses - in option B, they are connected with a semicolon; in option C, with a conjunction "so"; in option D, with a comma and a conjunction "and."
Answer:
the definition of truism is a statement that is obviously true and says nothing new or interesting
Explanation:
you coulve looked at google but its ok though.
Since we do not have the answer choices, the general answer below will help you choose the best definition for the word "epithet" as it is used in the excerpt:
Since the excerpt is about calling someone epithets such as "dear", we can conclude that "epithet" means a nickname, or an adjective that describes someone.
This question asks us to pay attention to context clues to figure out the meaning of a word.
A context clue is a piece of information given by an author that helps us understand the meaning of words in the text.
In this case, the context clue is the speaker calling the other person "dear", saying there is no lovelier epithet than this one.
With that information, we can conclude that an "epithet" is a nickname or an adjective we use to address others, usually expressing a characteristic of that person.
Learn more about epithets here:
brainly.com/question/1462097
When analyzing any literary work, be it a full text, an excerpt, or any document, for that matter, one way, or one technique that can be used is the analysis of a cause-effect, or causal relationship. Basically, this technique allows the critic to discover the links that exist between a situation, or an event, that takes place and the consequences that derive from said cause. It is almost like tracing a pattern backwards that explains why an action, or a result, happened. In order then for the reader, or critic to use this technique, he/she must take into consideration a series of things:
A: Describe the characters´ actions from past events. This is because, when you discover the past events, you can find an explanation and a link with the action realized and you can understand the sequence in the story.
B: Identify the cause of the action or event. This is a more direct pathway, as it establishes the direct link between cause and effect. In the first option, background history will explain in some form why a character acts in a certain way, but it may not always be the only cause. However, when you find the direct cause of an action, you find this causality.
D: Consider the effect of the action of event. By doing this you are continuing the process that is necessary to establish a cause and effect relationship. It gives you the full picture and the full understanding of the how, when, and why and also of the outcomes. It is almost like the finishing touch to unraveling the mystery in a story.
Answer:
The coach started without me.
Explanation:
