Answer: Khattam-Shud shows Haroun on the ship that each story in the Ocean requires its own type of poison to properly ruin it, and suggests how one can ruin different types of stories. Iff mutters that to ruin an Ocean of Stories, you add a Khattam-Shud. The Cultmaster continues that each story has an anti-story that cancels the original story out, which he mixes on the ship and pours into the ocean. Haroun, stunned, asks why Khattam-Shud hates stories so much, and says that stories are fun. Khattam Shud replies that the world isn't for fun, it's for controlling. He continues that in each story there is a world he cannot control, which is why he must kill them.
Explanation:
Iff here simplifies Khattam-Shud's explanation, as all that's needed to really end a story is to say it's over. However, Khattam-Shud is working to not just end stories by simply saying they're over, but to make them unappealing to audiences, which will then insure that they won't be told, Silence Laws or not. Think about the ancient stories around the Wellspring; they exist as an example of what happens when stories are deemed boring and not useful.
1. Man versus man: A situation in which two characters have opposing desires or interests. The typical scenario is a conflict between the protagonist and antagonist. This is an external conflict.
2. A character vs. nature conflict occurs when a character faces resistance from a natural force (as opposed to a supernatural force). ... This is the essence of the man versus nature conflict: man struggles with human emotions, while nature charges forth undeterred.
3. The man versus society conflict is when a protagonist has a strong belief against the majority of the community or surroundings and decides to act on it. Since this type of conflict is between a character and an outside group, it is classified as an external conflict.
4. Character versus self conflict (also called man vs. self conflict) is a type of conflict that takes place inside a character's mind. ... self literary conflict usually involves the main character's inner struggle with self-doubts, a moral dilemma, or their own nature
Answer: B
“They was” is not correct.
Answer:
I am 90% sure the answer is A or it could also be B but i am sure it is A.
Explanation:
Hope this helped im sorry if it was wrong hope you have a good day :)
Since there are no words in italics, let's analyze both parts of the sentence to know if they are independent clauses, subordinate clauses, or a fragment.
- The first part of the sentence is "<u>Although that particular source may not appear reasonable and accurate</u>." This is a subordinate clause.
It begins with a subordinating conjunction, "although", and it does not convey a complete thought on its own.
- The second part of the sentence is "<u>it is</u>." This is an independent clause.
This means this clause is capable of standing alone as a sentence and conveying a complete thought. Some words are, however, omitted because they were already mentioned in the subordinate clause.
- The sentence we are analyzing here consists of an independent clause and a dependent one.
- However, that may be difficult to see at first because the independent clause has omitted some words.
- The reason for that is the fact that those words have already been mentioned in the subordinate clause. To avoid repetition, we omit them.
- But, to better understand the clauses, let's rewrite them with the omitted words. Let's also place the independent clause first:
"<u>That particular source is reasonable and accurate, although that particular source may not appear reasonable and accurate.</u>" - See how repetitive it is?
- Now, it is easier to visualize:
- "<u>It is</u>" (or "that particular source is reasonable and accurate) - independent clause expressing a complete thought.
2. "<u>Although that particular source may not appear reasonable and accurate</u>" - dependent clause; has a subordinating conjunction; does not express a complete thought on its own.
Learn more about the topic here:
brainly.com/question/11717387
