The literary device used in the first sentence is a hyperbole or exaggeration, whereas the second sentence uses an oxymoron, as further explained below.
<h3>What is a hyperbole?</h3>
A hyperbole is a literary device that exaggerates something in order to emphasize an idea. In the first sentence we are analyzing here, the hyperbole is found in "a ton of snow." The speaker wishes to emphasize the idea that there was a lot of snow on his car. However, it would be impossible for there to be indeed a ton of it.
<h3>What is an oxymoron?</h3>
The literary device known as oxymoron consists of putting together two words with opposite meanings. In the second sentence, the oxymoron is found in "genuine imitation." If something is genuine, that means it is not fake, not an imitation. So, technically, the two words do not go together.
With the information above in mind, we can conclude that the answer provided above is correct.
Learn more about hyperbole here:
brainly.com/question/2142709
#SPJ1
Answer:
It should say "Just ninety cents for a bag" and not "just nintey sense for a bag"
Hope this helps!
Have a nice day((:
Explanation:
The answer is c) make a left
Answer: It implies that the cherry trees are a new addition to Washington, D.C.
Explanation:
The word "novel" affected the meaning of the sentence as it implies that the cherry trees are a new addition to Washington, D.C
The novel characteristic being referred to by the narrator implies cherry trees doesn't grow in Washington before but it now does.
Answer:
Tintin arguably serves as a better Indiana Jones 4 than Kingdom of The Crystal Skull. The score, cinematography, and progressively intriguing plot make this film such a joy to watch. There’s whimsical action for the children (which bars few holds on the more gritty/dangerous side to adventuring) and the storytelling is done in such a way that people of all ages would find it hard not to be captivated. The visuals alone make this movie so much more than it probably ever dreamt of being. Never before had I seen such clearly cartoonish characters which I saw feasible of meeting in the real world. Every pore and hair follicle was met with such vigorous attention to detail, and yet these characters unmistakably resemble their respective source material. I was thoroughly taken aback at every turn of this movie, and the near photorealistic CGI certainly made it that much more fun to watch. A must-see for any fan of Speilberg’s finest work!
