Answer + Explanation:
The speeches that Brutus and Mark Antony deliver differ in several ways. However, one of the most important differences they exhibit is the way in which each speaker addresses the audience.
In the case of <u>Brutus</u>, he decides to appeal to his audience's minds. He speaks in a somewhat impersonal way that suggests that he does not understand the audience deeply. Moreover, his description of the motives of the plot is dry, and it underestimates the connection that the audience felt to Julius Caesar.
On the other hand, <u>Mark Antony</u> seems to understand the crowd better. He uses emotional words that create a more personal relationship. He also focuses on the importance that Julius Caesar had for the audience. This creates a more successful and dramatic speech.
The subjunctive mood is the best.
The subjunctive is rarely used in colloquial English. Totally irrelevant information, but... it is a relic from Latin, where there are many uses for a subjunctive. There is even a special conditional using the subjunctive mood that expresses the exact circumstances you described, which is usually called future less vivid.
<span>When evaluating sources for a compare-and-contrast paragraph, you can tell if a source’s argument is objective if it A. </span><span>appeals to logic and reason rather than emotion.
A source's argument is objective when it is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions. Objective arguments represent only the facts and not opinions.</span>
<em>The United States Senate declined to approve Wilson's Treaty of Versailles, citing concerns that, among other things, American participation in the League of Nations would mean that American troops would be dispatched to Europe to handle European issues. American forces landed in France in the late summer of 1918.</em>
<em>When members of the Senate believe their concerns have not been satisfactorily addressed, treaties have been rejected. The Treaty of Versailles, which formally concluded World War I, was rejected by the Senate in 1919, in part because President Woodrow Wilson had failed to examine senators' concerns to the deal.</em>
