Answer:
it does not because it does not specify and if it is offering a poem it could be an idea for someone
Explanation:
Answer:
The correct answer is:
A. repetition and parallelism to convey this connection.
Explanation:
In the excerpt the author uses a style for his writing based in repetition and parallelism choices. It is possible to say that he uses a repetitive literal choice, since he chooses an entire group of words to describe an idea as he mentions several participants or objects of the same kind to explain the purpose of the composition. At the same time, the author is using a parallel structure because he uses the same structure several times to show his ideas about the concept he wants to show to the reader.
The argument is <em>that children go to school to learn not to teach their elders ,</em> where teachers can be included. Public schools are subsidised with taxes. Bearing this in mind, we may say that taxpayers send their children to school for them to learn not to teach. This was what the taxpayers did when <em>they themselves </em>were students . Therefore, t<em>axpayers send their children to school on the premise that, at their age, they needed to learn, not teach </em>is the reasoning of the argument.
It can inspire you or give you and idea of where and how to start. By examining a model of a literary analysis, you can see what you must actually do, basically it can help you just get an idea of what to do and how to start.
This question refers to the article "Do Juvenile Killers Deserve Life Behind Bars?" by Nina Totenberg.
In this article, Totenberg discusses whether life in prison is too harsh a punishment for juvenile killers. The author does not take a position on this matter, and instead focuses on presenting arguments that describe both sides of the question. The main purpose of the author is to encourage readers to think about the subject because legislation needs to be passed soon, and this is a difficult question that deserves consideration. She shows how important this matter is when she says:
<em>"Two years ago, the court used the same rationale when it struck down the penalty of life without parole for nonhomicide crimes committed by juveniles. But in Tuesday's cases, the court faces the question of life without parole in homicide cases... the big question before the Supreme Court on Tuesday is whether life without the possibility of parole is itself an unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment when it is applied to juveniles."</em>
