What is the ambiguity technique in literature?

English

2 answers:

katen-ka-za [31]3 years ago

6 0

Answer: The right answer is the A) Sections of a work can be interpreted in more than one way.

Explanation: Just to elaborate a little on the answer, it can be added that ambiguity refers specifically to the technique by means of which a sentence or even an entire argument can be understood in different ways, often leading to unclear, vague and even humorous interpretations, but quite often too to enriched and elevated texts. There are various types of ambiguities (the structure of the sentence can be ambiguous, for instance, or one word in particular can have various possible meanings), but a clear and easy example of ambiguity could be this one: "Mary saw the girl with glasses." Could Mary see the girl because Mary was wearing glasses, o was the girl Mary saw wearing glasses?

frez [133]3 years ago

3 0

<span>Sections of a work can be interpreted in more than one way.</span>

You might be interested in

what argument about the role of Northern civilians is President Abraham Lincoln making in this excerpt from the Gettysburg Addre

mihalych1998 [28]

Answer:

Lincoln arguments at Gettysburg cemetery address where based on the fact that the life of those who lost their lives during the civil war must be remembered by creating a monument for them so as to remember them and be known that their death which has bought freedom as a form of sacrifice to their country.

Explanation:

President Abraham Lincoln was at National Cemetery in Gettysburg in Pennysylvania in 1863 which was the area where the Civil War battle was decided. It was the spot where the Union and the Conservatives lost their soldiers during the Civil War.

However, in his argument, President Lincoln made the following argument in support of the Northern civilians:

He suggested that the falling heroes can be remembered only when civilians build memorials for the dead.
Lincoln argued that the dead can be happy by civilians helping their families to survive.
He argued that the civilian can give the dead happiness by helping and putting more effort towards the goals they died for.
He argued that the civilians joining the army will and always give them victory.
He argued that monetary contribution by the civilian can make them win the war.
He also argued that the life of dead ones has brought about freedom in the land and that democracy which is the government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish.