Variation of Language:
Language is truly adaptable, and poetry shows this maybe better than some other type of composing. You can compose a work with a numerically firm design and exact beat, or compose a free-section sonnet without accentuation and capital letters
Language used in poetry:
Poetry is extraordinary on the grounds that it presents a language that is unmistakably against the standard, regular, conversational language whose main object is correspondence.
In any event, when it is present day, free-section poetry, it is disengaged from the normal utilization of language since it is generally exceptionally conscious, estimated by its, still up in the air by the standards or even by the deficiency in that department.
Learn more about Poetry on:
brainly.com/question/987165
#SPJ4
Answer:
Explanation:
The Articles of Confederation comprised the United States’ first constitution, lasting from 1776 until 1789. The Articles established a weak central government and placed most powers in the hands of the states. Under the Articles, the US economy faltered, since the central government lacked the power to enforce tax laws or regulate commerce. Shays’s Rebellion, an uprising of Revolutionary War veterans in Massachusetts that both the state and national governments struggled to address due to a lack of centralized military power, illustrated the need to create a stronger governing system. The United States’ transition from a ragtag group of colonies to a successful independent nation was a little like the transition period from childhood to adulthood. As the colonies matured, American colonists grew to despise being treated as the children of Great Britain. Like rebellious teens, they vowed that when they won their independence, their government would be nothing like that of the mother country. It’s no surprise that when the leaders of the former colonies finally did get the chance to set up their own government as the new United States, they were mostly focused on trying to avoid what they had perceived as abuses wrought by an overly-powerful government. Their first constitution was called the Articles of Confederation. It bound the states together in a loose “league of friendship” that permitted the states to retain nearly all government power. The Articles of Confederation held the new United States together long enough for it to prevail in the Revolutionary War, but once the war was over the league of friends quickly became a league of impoverished quibblers. The Founders had been so concerned with making sure the central government couldn’t become too powerful that they neglected to make it powerful enough to solve the issues facing a new nation. The American states evolved from separate colonies, with unique histories and societies. In the years before and during the Revolution, they learned to find common cause with each other, but they hardly saw themselves as a unified nation. The Articles of Confederation exemplified this mindset. The document created a confederacy, in which states considered themselves independent entities linked together for limited purposes, such as national defense. State governments had the sovereignty to rule within their own territories. The national government had few powers. It could coin money, direct the post office, and negotiate with foreign powers, including Native American tribes. To raise money or soldiers, it could only request that the states provide what was needed. The national government had only one branch, the Confederation Congress, in which each state had one vote. Populous Virginia had no more political power than tiny Delaware. The requirements for passing measures were quite high: nine of the thirteen states had to approve a measure for it to pass. Amending the Articles themselves was even harder: all thirteen had to vote in favor of a change. One of the biggest problems was that the national government had no power to impose taxes. To avoid any perception of “taxation without representation,” the Articles of Confederation allowed only state governments to levy taxes. To pay for its expenses, the national government had to request money from the states. The states, however, were often negligent in this duty, and so the national government was underfunded. Without money, the US government could not pay debts owed from the Revolution or easily secure new funds. Foreign governments were reluctant to loan money to a nation that might never repay it. The fiscal problems of the central government meant that the currency it issued, called the Continental, was largely worthless. The country’s economic woes were made worse by the fact that the central government also lacked the power to impose tariffs on foreign imports or regulate interstate commerce. Thus, it couldn’t protect American producers from foreign competitors. Compounding the problem, states often imposed tariffs on items produced by other states and otherwise interfered with their neighbors’ trade. The national government under the Articles also lacked the power to raise an army or navy. Fears of a standing army in the employ of a tyrannical government had led the writers of the Articles of Confederation to leave defense largely to the states. Although the central government could declare war and agree to peace, it had to depend upon the states to provide soldiers. If state governors chose not to honor the national government’s request, the country would lack an adequate defense. The weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation became apparent to all as a result of an uprising of Massachusetts farmers known as Shays’s Rebellion. In the summer of 1786, farmers in western Massachusetts were heavily in debt, facing imprisonment and the loss of their lands.
A. They add a bit of humor to a serious mood. The fact that she asked them to bring her back a job is just funny, so it is definitely A.
D because a punctuation never goes after and .
Answer:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to you to express my delight with the excellent service and high quality of food that your restaurant provided us last Sunday, on the occasion of my 30th birthday.
We were a party of fifteen, which include my family, close friends and colleagues from work. Your staff went out of their way to provide seating arrangements that were easily accessible and did not interfere with other diners. I find that this is unusual in many restaurants these days. The waiters were extremely professional and polite and were obviously experienced as they did not encroach too much on the proceeding.
Your current menu offers a great deal of choice, as does your wine list, and everything was available. We were very satisfied with the quality or quantity of the dishes served, and the presentation of each dish was akin to the dishes produced in shows such as 'Master Chef'.
I ordered the rack or mutton ribs, which was deliciously succulent and, if anything, maybe slightly too large. Nevertheless, we managed to finish it. I was similarly impressed with the variety of local and international wines you served. The wine that was ordered arrived at the correct temperature that each wine should be consumed. The waiters were familiar with the etiquette, and the service was paramount.
All in all, our group enjoyed a delicious meal at your establishment, and I had a very happy birthday.
Congratulations once again.
Yours faithfully,
Sharon DMello
pls mark me as brainlist
