The option that identifies the context clue that would be most helpful in determining the meaning of the underlined word is remarkable no so much for...as for their senseless brutality, here we have a contrast with the use of the word as between the descriptions, senseless brutality is a negative description and since we are talking about the use of comparison the meaning of munificence has to be positive according to the context.
In fact, munificence is a positive word it is a synonym of generosity, in this way the expression remarkable no so much for...as for their senseless brutality is the clue that helps you understand the meaning of the word.
The other options are not correct because they don't have a direct connection with the specific word we want to understand.
Answer:
The main characters are: Brom Van Brunt, Ichabod Crane, Katrina Van Tassel.
Explanation:
Katrina Van Tassel: she is a rich and beautiful girl and represents the romantic interest, in which the protagonist and the antagonist deposit their love and desire. Katrina is an 18-year-old girl and knows that she has a strong sensual appeal to the men of the city. She highlights her own attributes as a way of getting attention from those she desires.
Brom Van Brunt: He is the antagonist of the story and wants to prevent the protagonist from winning Katrina's love, as he is also in love with her. He is admired in the region and is a skilled and daring man.
Ichabod Crane: He is the protagonist who disputes Katrina's love with Brom. Ichabod is not as admired in the city and has disadvantages as winning the woman he wants. He is also not as strong and handsome as Brom.
Answer:
Distance North or South of the Equator.
Explanation:
Answer:
CMC examples includes email, network, and more therefore the answr is d
Explanation:
The correct answer is C. Although Peterson's comments may have been valid at one time, his book is over 30 years old.
This sentence is challenging the credibility of Peterson's book because it is old. At one point, his arguments may have been correct, but this has certainly changed over time given that over 30 years have passed since he published his book. Now, there are newer opinions about the topic, so he isn't a credible source anymore.
