The Answer is D for the question
Answer:
The Madagascans had cultural values based on family.
Explanation:
The answer “The Madagascans had religious beliefs based on the land” is not correct, because while land does play the role in "A Madagascan Myth”, the myth does not tell the story of the land.
<u> The answer “The Madagascans had cultural values based on family.” is correct. </u><u>In the myth, God Ndriananahary creates the Sun to find and </u><u>help his son</u><u> on the earth. Therefore, we can see how much he </u><u>cared for the family</u><u>. Additionally, the myth mentions the </u><u>importance of ancestors and their spirits on earth. For people, dead spirits of the family are important to guide and protect them, Therefore, the family values are important in order to have a good life and happiness, and the love and care for the family can bring great things. </u>
The answer “The Madagascans had religious beliefs based on the sun” is not true. The myth does talk about the creation of the sun, but it does not say the belief system is based upon it.
The answer “The Madagascans had cultural values based on safety.” is not correct. While safety is important in the myth (safety of Ndriananahary’s sons and safety of people protected by ancestors), it is the part of the belief and the need of the people, while cultural and religious values lie in the family values. Therefore, it can be concluded that family is important to have safety, which puts the core of the cultural value in the concept of family.
Answer:
I think it would be all of the above, if you could provide a passage with the question it would be helpful. But I'm not 100% sure if it would be all of the above.
Answer:
Social skills
social communication
interpersonal communication
<span>the first poster does have a point about trying to do your own homework, but you get a pass with me this time because i really, really like macbeth (which i also had to learn in a class). anyways, here's my impression of it.....
1. this is one of my favorite verses in shakespeare and it's necessary because by the end of the play you can see how far macbeth has fallen.... he starts out as a "good guy"... brave, noble, a good swordsman, a great leader, ironically he naturally has all of the attributes that make a good and just king
2. macbeth is still not fully transformed (in personality at least) from good to evil and he is therefore still sorry that he has killed duncan whose blood is literally on his hands, so much that he is unwilling to go back and frame duncan's attendants for murder. lady macbeth on the other hand, who sees the prize (kingship) close at hand, is ashamed at how weak he appears and is unaffected by the blood on her hands after she finishes macbeth's job for him, noting that all they need is some water to clear them of the deed...
3. macbeth's change is seen by his willingness to kill essentially his best friend (banquo) because of the potential threat he poses... also if you juxtapose his speech with lady macbeth before he kills banquo and this one when he plots to kill banquo, in the former he is far more timid and unsure while here he is the one pressing the issue... before, he doesn't want to kill duncan partially because of how "good" he is, but now, presented with a person who not only has similar qualities but is also HIS BEST FRIEND, he has NO problems in ordering his murder.
4. he kills macduff's family because the witches tell him that macduff most likely will cause his downfall.... i think his decision to kill macduff's family as well as his best friend banquo shows that he is ruthless and willing to do anything, even kill innocents in order to hold on to his kingship. also the more evil he does the more isolated he becomes, as he loses allies to suspicion, (nobles, macduff, malcolm), madness (lady macbeth) and murder (banquo), so he keeps killing because he basically realizes that he cannot turn back and therefore must keep on the evil path he has chosen for himself...
5. macbeth basically is sorry that lady macbeth died at such an inopportune time so he could not give her a proper farewell. he then speaks about how essentially pointless the span of life can be, comparing it first to a candle, which burns brightly but has a finite length of time before it is extinguished, then to an actor or a stage for a short time. both metaphors do a good job of conveying how small each life is to the grand scheme of things; our life, our TIME is finite and comes to an end yet TIME itself moves on irrespective of what happens to each of us, or how bright or dim each of our own candles were.</span>
