Answer: 1. do things to please specifically you
2. straight up tell you
3. text/call you randomly to check up on you
Explanation:
Answer:
I’ll add as well if you want
Explanation:
To be reticent is to not reveal one's thoughts readily. In this case, it is the reticence of the author. The author does not reveal their thoughts readily. If the narrator or author refuses to do something, it is made known that he is doing something. The something here is him refusing. If he acts as if the situation is normal, I'd assume he is acting in such a way that would be nonreactionary of the actions from the provoker. I would safely choose the last option as sorrentino's exercising of authorial reticence.
The correct answer is C. Observing what happened to the Spartans and the Romans shows that it is best to destroy a newly acquired state that is accustomed to freedom.
Explanation:
The text focuses on explaining the differences between the Spartans and the Romans when conquering new territories. The author explains the Romans destroyed and dismantled new territories, and were successful. On the opposite, the Spartans were not successful because they only established a government in new territories.
This implies, destroying new states is a better strategy than allowing freedom, this is reinforced by the idea "he who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it may expect to be destroyed by it" that shows the need to destroy or dismantle new states to control them. Thus, the main idea is that destruction is the best strategy to use with acquired states which is proven by comparing Spartans and Romans.
