The correct answer is C, decomposition.
Explanation:
It would be to decompose and clear the traces and amounts of these nutrients for the uptake of other living beings, including plants, to ultimately allow for these materials to be converted along with new nutrients to be increased again.Biogeochemical cycles distribute the nutrients from the soil to the plants, animals, and microorganisms. These organisms die, and their organic matter disintegrates, and add back the nitrogen, carbon, and phosphorous following to the pool.
I believe that writers are definitely justified in challenging the artistic status quo, because that's what true artists do. But to answer the question of why they do it, there are more answers. Think of Emily Dickinson, for example. She always strongly stood by her own freedoms and decisions to go against the current, and she's one of the most famous of American writers because of it. Aside from the fact she wanted to, going against the norm for writers often gives them more attention than if they wrote what was "expected" at the time. When studying famous American writers, we are often told to study things that they did differently than most, some, mostly the less notable today, only had minor differences, like they made their stories from different tenses, etc. But the most notorious used themes that may have been taboo and writing styles even more diverse. There is always the counter culture and most writers that we study belonged to it, sick of the large amount of similar, traditional stories that lacked element, or simply wanted to stand out.
Another reason could be that writers wanted to spread the written word to all different kinds of things that have yet to be written about, different characters that haven't yet been discovered. And there are the related reasons like how writers didn't even know they were writing for the public, only time tells, like with Ann Frank. She wasn't afraid to put opinions down on paper because it was her own personal journal but it had become a famous piece of literature because of the opinions.
I think writers break from tradition because the traditions are often not realistic and these artists are the only ones who will tell the truth, and that is why they do it, and that is why they are so important.
What is dismal about the hypothetical happenings Juliet
imagines in Act IV, Scene III, is that they are all quite morbidly pessimistic. She imagines that the potion could be
poison. She wonders if she’ll suffocate
in the tomb before she awakens and before Romeo comes for her. She wonders what it would be like to awaken in
the tomb before Romeo comes to her and where Tybalt is decomposing and wonders
if there will be ghosts. And, the last
hypothetical situation she ponders is whether or not she’ll go crazy in the
tomb, pull Tybalt’s corpse out of the burial garb and beat her brains out with a
relative’s bone. In addition to being
pessimistic, this is all quite dismal.
I don't remember what his name means, but he was very bitter and power hungry. :)
