Answer:
"Marchionini and Maurer (1995b) did not see libraries as having three roles in learning".
Explanation:
In order to present the negative form of a sentence, you must first observe what is the verb that sentence presents. A verb is any word that indicates the performance of an action, or the existence of a state of mind or behavior. In the case of the above sentence, the verb is the word "saw" which is the past form of the verb "to see". The negative sentence must show that this action, determined by the verb, was not performed.
The verb "saw" needs an auxiliary verb to present its negative form, this auxiliary is the word "do" which will assist the verb "saw" both in presenting the negative form and in presenting the verb in the past tense. Thus, the "do" should be presented in the past tense instead of "saw", then "do" will be presented as "did" and "saw" will be presented as "see". The word "not" must be presented in the sentence, to show the concept of negativity, but it will be associated with the auxiliary verb and therefore it must be presented after "did" and before "see", forming the expression "did not see "which should replace the verb" saw "in the original sentence.
Therefore, the sentence in its negative form would be: "Marchionini and Maurer (1995b) did not see libraries as having three roles in learning".
APA style you can never go wrong
The answer is:
B) True, because otherwise people won’t understand what you are trying to say.
Hope I helped ^-^
~<u><em>Midoriya</em></u>
The Declaration of Independence is still used as an argument today because it makes several statements about equality and morality that are the basis for much of modern society. The section that most people will remember, the part that states that all people deserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is still applicable today.
Just to list an example of one way that the Declaration of Independence can be used as an argument, the aforementioned section can easily be used to justify equality. If everyone deserves to be able to live happily, doesn't that mean everyone, including people of different genders, races, and nationalities? This excerpt is from Martin Luther King Jr.'s famous "I Have a Dream" speech:
"<span>In a sense we have come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
The Declaration of Independence can be used as a moral argument. Morally, most Americans believe that everyone deserves the same rights and treatment regardless of their background. It cannot be objectively stated that everyone deserves the same chance at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but most people will agree that this is true because of their morals.
Hope this helps!</span>
