Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
I have trouble believing Mr. Sawicki's characterization of Steve, because he knows Steve only in school. Since Mr. Sawicki does not know Steve outside of school, he cannot make a judgment about what Steve has been doing in his neighborhood or who his friends are. Sawicki says Steve is honest, but even if Steve is good or honest in Mr. Sawicki's opinion, good people can still make mistakes.
What did you consider when you were writing your answer? Check all that apply.
what Mr. Sawicki says
. what other people say
. whether Steve is guilty or innocent
. what Steve has said
Answer:
what Mr. Sawicki says
Explanation:
The answer shown in the text above was created considering only what Mr. Sawicki says about Steve. The answer states that Steve's characterization through what Mr. Sawicki says is not reliable. That's because Mr. Sawicki doesn't know Steve fully and only knows his behavior in one place, at school. Mr. Sawicki does not know anything about Steve and does not even know how he behaves outside of school, so he cannot say that Steve is honest. In other words, Mr. Sawicki's speech is imprecise, it lacks evidence and therefore cannot be trusted.
Answer:
In my opinion choice B
Explanation:
because it's not conditional in a way that the subject doesn't know about the pan as a surprise to her so even if they don't buy the pans the subject will still cook the pancakes with "another" pan
(hope I was helpful thanks and sorry)
The answer is option B: The vacant stare and the look of terror that had followed.
In the passage from "The Story of an Hour," by Kate Chopin, it is not necessary to separate the subject with two elements with a comma - the vacant stare and the look of terror.
Options A, C and D are incorrect because they contain a misplaced comma.
Answer us d because they would show you if you rito thry he know how to make
