Answer:
Explanation:
The Declaration of Independence is perhaps the most masterfully written state paper of Western civilization. As Moses Coit Tyler noted almost a century ago, no assessment of it can be complete without taking into account its extraordinary merits as a work of political prose style. Although many scholars have recognized those merits, there are surprisingly few sustained studies of the stylistic artistry of the Declaration.1 This essay seeks to illuminate that artistry by probing the discourse microscopically--at the level of the sentence, phrase, word, and syllable. By approaching the Declaration in this way, we can shed light both on its literary qualities and on its rhetorical power as a work designed to convince a "candid world" that the American colonies were justified in seeking to establish themselves as an independent nation.2
The text of the Declaration can be divided into five sections--the introduction, the preamble, the indictment of George III, the denunciation of the British people, and the conclusion. Because space does not permit us to explicate each section in full detail, we shall select features from each that illustrate the stylistic artistry of the Declaration as a whole.3
The introduction consists of the first paragraph--a single, lengthy, periodic sentence:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.4
Ani analyses how "DeLuca's haphazard patchwork of reasoning and evidence leaves the reader wondering whether he believes his own claim". According to Ani he quotes not only supporters of the Nobel price committee but also detractors. He includes a sampling of Dylan's lyrics and leaves them to speak for themselves.
The evidence (quotes) from the article that best supports Ani's evaluation are:
1. "And it’s a good thing [his lyrics] have been published, because if you’ve gone to see the famously sneering and syllable-garbling Dylan play live in recent years, you probably couldn’t understand a word he was singing."
We could interpret this quote as contradictory, it is not necessarily for or against Dylan's Nobel Price. You could say he is confusing his readers, he seems to be against the sung lyrics and for the published ones.
2. "On one end of Dylan's songwriting spectrum is the vengeful, resolute, and timeless 'Masters Of War' . . . . It’s high dudgeon at its finest: ‘Let me ask you one question: Is your money that good? / Will it buy you forgiveness? Do you think that it could?"
Ani also says that he does a sampling of the lyrics and allows them to speak for themselves. This excerpt shows part of a lyric from the song "Masters of War". He is not necessarily saying its a "good" or "bad" lyric, he describes it as: "vengeful, resolute, and timeless" the reader must decide about its quality or if it is the kind of work that deserves a Nobel Price.
D i think... it might be c but c sounds like a less formal answer so i would go with d im sorry if its wrong
The answer is B at the beginning. Hope this helps
You should write about when you first started taking care of the pet and fedding it and playing games with the pets toys and how you watched it
