Which of the following terms would not be included in an explanation of literal language?

2 answers:

6 0

It'd be a metaphor. A metaphor is a figure of speech where an object or phrase is applied to an object or action where it isn't literally applicable.

Zigmanuir [339]4 years ago

5 0

The term that would not be included in an explanation of literal language is a methaphor which is totally th eopposite of literal language. First option is correct.

A metaphor is a figure of speech that describes an object or action in a way that isn’t literally true, but helps explain an idea or make a comparison. This resource states and describes one thing that is another thing not because they actually are the same, but for the sake of comparison or symbolism.

You might be interested in

Which sentence contains an action verb rather than a “to be” verb?The garden is my grandmother’s pride and joy.The number of bee

Kryger [21]

The answer is: The flowers in the garden bloom beautifully.

The verb to be can be conjugated as am, is, are, was, were or been, and it signifies to exist, occur o take place. In that respect, the chosen sentence does not possess the verb to be - it actually contains the verb bloom, which means to produce flowers.

The rest of the sentences are incorrect because all of them include conjugations of the verb to be, such as is and was.

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Which quote from Martin Luther King, Jr.’s speech best proves the author’s purpose?

12345 [234]

Answer:

I believe it's A or C.

I'm leaning towards C because it explains his goal better than A, rather than just using the vague word, "freedom."

5 0

3 years ago

Ideas for a love story?