The option that is MOST LIKELY reason he chose these words is option A: He is trying to emphasize urgency and motivate South Africans to move forward in their efforts for freedom. He is trying to emphasize urgency and motivate South Africans to move forward in their efforts for freedom.
<h3>What is Mandela's purpose in his speech how does he achieve this purpose?</h3>
The topic of Nelson Mandela's speech is one that is all nonviolent methods that had been tried, according to Mandela, and they had only served to lower Africans' freedom and impose more and more constraints.
The point of Nelson Mandela's speech is that Nelson Mandela wants to educate people about South Africa's difficulties and what would happen to the country now that he is president. Nelson wants to inspire people to take up the cause of equal rights. He seeks to bring everyone together and it is one that is an urgent task.
Therefore, based on the above, The option that is the reason he chose these words is option A: He is trying to emphasize urgency and motivate South Africans to move forward in their efforts for freedom. He is trying to emphasize urgency and motivate South Africans to move forward in their efforts for freedom.
Learn more about Mandela’s speech from
brainly.com/question/18483032
#SPJ1
I am actually working on this play myself, I play titania and I can tell you the answer is C
This is the line <span>from "The Pardoner's Tale" which reveals the Pardoner's feelings towards those to whom he preaches:
</span><span>"A yokel mind loves stories from of old..."
Yokel means uneducated. </span>
Answer:
Straw man fallacy.
Explanation:
Fallacy is the use of wrong or invalid argument in the construction of any reasoning to make one's point. It typically involves the use of faulty arguments, which neither is correct nor valid.
Straw man fallacy is the form of fallacy wherein the person giving the argument is basing his points in a such a way that he seems to be refuting his opponent's points. But in reality, he is just refuting an argument that is not even presented by the opponent. In short, he is refuting an argument that is baseless or invisible. It 's like attacking a "straw man", useless and pointless.
From the excerpt, we see the speaker is in favor of hanging the man. While it may be that this "Jones" may have argued for a trial for the accused. The issue of hanging wasn't part of the argument, and not even mentioned. But the speaker is asking for that, thus bringing into the fore the issue of 'hanging' which wasn't even spoken or discussed about.
