I can’t believe they gave that first entire paragraph for religion, but it certainly isn’t satire so I’m guessing this is the order:
1. Repetition
2. Rhetorical Question
3. Satire
Answer:
sizzle the fires in the oil.
I'm guessing that is how you need help
Answer:
The man was about to be hanged.
Explanation:
Ambrose Bierce's short story "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" tells the story of how a convicted man was about to be hanged on the railroad bridge. The man, Peyton Farquhar, was a plantation farmer who was accused of trying to burn down the bridge during the Civil War.
The lines/ excerpt given in the question is from the first paragraph of the story which shows Peyton waiting for his death. The author/ speaker of the story is describing the scene and setting of the story, the exact point where we see Peyton (yet unnamed) waiting for the rope to be pulled which will finalize his death.
Answer:
A warrior <u>frightens</u> a gruesome monster <u>away.</u>
Explanation:
When you complete a sentence you have to make sure that the combination o verb and predicate are compatible, and that they express in the best possible way what you are trying to say. So let's analyze the answers:
1) frightens; away: this is grammatically correct, and both words combine well and add meaning to the message.
2) splits; in half: this is grammatically incorrect, it would have to be "into halves" or "in two"
3) kills; forever: kills already implies is forever, it is repetitive
4)beats; in pieces: beats doesn't imply that the monster was split into pieces, so these two words don't combine.
