The kind of phrase the underlined words in the sentence is: A. <span>adverb phrase. As the name suggests, an adverb phrase functions the same way the adverb does. It modifies a adjective, verb, and adverb. In the sentence above, the phrase provides more details on the adjective "thousands". </span>
Answer:True
Explanation: While editing, you should ensure that your details help prove your thesis in some way. Select one: True False Feedback The correct answer is 'True'.
The textual evidence that best supports the claim above is:
- "At nine o clock on the morning of the first of May. 1919. a young man spoke to the room clerk at the Biltmore Hotel, asking if Mr. Philip Dean were registered there, and if so, could he be connected with Mr. Dean's rooms."
- "A few minutes later Philip Dean, dressed in blue silk pajamas, opened his door and the two young men greeted each other with a half-embarrassed exuberance They were both about twenty-four, Yale graduates of the year before the war; but there the resemblance stopped abruptly."
<h3>What is textual evidence?</h3>
Textual evidence is the part of a text that supports a claim that is being made therein.
Hence, it is right to indicate that the evidence form the text that is suggestive of the fact that Phillip and Dean had a good relationship in the past are those indicated above.
Learn more about textual evidence at:
brainly.com/question/375033
#SPJ1
In the story of “Shooting an Elephant”, when the narrator views the body of the Burmese man who had been creased to death in a crucifix-styled posture, he has an overwhelming attack of conscience. The narrator realizes that just like the Burmese man, the elephant had been crucified, as well, and it does not appease the narrator that his killing the elephant was within legal parameters.The narrator apprehends that the law and conscience are often not well-matched. He is there in an official capability and is hated for it by the Burmese. He equally has hated them for their anger. Yet, when he allows his morality to surface, he understands that he is part of the structure that is there to tyrannize the Burmese. The fact that he holds a position of authority does not essentially make it a moral duty. This is true of his killing the elephant. He did not want to lose face in front of the Burmese, and he was legally justified in killing it, but morally he knows that it was actually morally wrong.
