1.) Fog and cats
It talks about how the <em /><em>fog </em>creeps in on cat feet and then it says that it looks at the harbor sitting on <em>its haunces.
</em>Since there's only one poem here, I can't answer the entire question<em>
</em>
Things definitely weren’t right.
From this sentence he started speaking in first person.
I would say C. It seems like he is saying that the two have different strategies.
Answer:
by believing in God
Explanation:
According to Edwards in "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God," people can avoid going to hell by believing in God and turning from their wicked ways.
The preacher in his famous sermon said that sin was the reason why many people would go to hell, but that repentance, by believing in God would save them from eternal suffering.
1. Assuming that the underlined words are 'Carl Sandburg,' the correct answer is A. simple subject. Although you may be led to believe this is a complete subject (because it consists of more than one word), in fact, it is not. Carl Sandburg is the name and the surname of one person, which is why it is considered to be a simple, rather than a complete subject.
2. Assuming that the underlined words are '<span>served as a soldier during the Spanish-American War,' the correct answer is D. complete predicate. As you can see, these words include the simple verb served, as well as all other words which modify, or describe that verb. This is why this is complete, rather than a simple predicate. Simple predicate would be only the word served.
3. Assuming that the underlined words are 'would influence,' the correct answer is B. simple predicate. Similarly to the first sentence, you may be led to believe this is complete because there are more than one word in the phrase. However, the verb phrase would influence is considered to be one entity given that it is only a particular tense of that verb. Even if it said 'had been influencing' instead of 'would influence,' it would still be a simple predicate.</span>
