Gladwell’s message is a simple one: to be successful one has to have a certain level of skill or knowledge or intelligence, and one has to be presented with opportunities of which one can take advantage.
Answer:
this should help
Explanation:
The author of "The Lady or the Tiger?" never reveals what is behind the door. The princess indicates that her lover should choose the door on the right, however, we know that the princess—like her father—has a “barbaric” streak. Furthermore, we know that she hates the lady behind the door and is sick at the thought of her lover being married to her. Ultimately, it is left up to the reader to decide what they think emerged from the door—a lady or a tiger?Stockton, the author of the work, deliberately did not give us the "right" answer to this question. Given that, we can guess and surmise and speculate; however, the answer is still, ultimately, a matter of opinion.Think about this people. The story explains about her barbaric nature like her father’s. We are also told that her lover “knows” her true nature. If these things are true, the princess would have directed him to the door with the tiger, but her lover would have known that. Consequently, he would have chosen the door she did not indicate, and he and the beautiful girl would live happily ever after.With all due respect, I think #3 needs to look at the quoted section of text more closely. " How in her grievous reveries had she gnashed her teeth, and torn her hair, when she saw his start of rapturous delight as he opened the door of the lady!" The princess did not want him to find happiness with anyone else. She had a barbaric nature, and she knew that the beautiful young woman had cast glances upon her lover, and she had perceived those glances to be returned. This would not been taken lightly, and it is safe to say it would probably not be forgiven. In addition, let us not forget the "savage blood" that coursed through her and the "barbaric" ancestry she came from, and the fact that she hated the woman behind the door. It would seem that due to her barbaric nature she would have not wanted her lover to find happiness with another woman, and so we could assume she guided him to the door with the tiger.
Now with all that being said, we are told also that her lover ". . . understood her nature. . .", so if that is true then perhaps he would know she might not want any other woman to have him, and he would choose the door opposite the one she directed him to. So if the lady came out, perhaps it was because he outwitted his barabic lover.
The correct answer is number 3. eye, lips, nose
As per the question, countenance is said to have a description of calm facial expression, visage, appearance, and the look or the expression of the face. Also, consider expressing a person's character or mood. Countenance can also be a support or encouragement, composure, and also, self-control. To be able to use countenance in a sentence, take this as an example:
Look at the countenance of the man while the different persons were bidding on his wife.
Or maybe use this as another reference and another example to further understand what countenance really means:
Upon entering the greenhouse, her countenance became radiant that she recites the names of the flowers with which she is familiar, by the sense of smell alone.
I looked this question up and found the underlined word is "declaration" and that it is supposed to be used as a verb in the new sentence.
Answer:
After reframing the sentence, we have:
The collector declared the local holiday.
Explanation:
The noun "declaration" is formed by adding the suffix -ation to the verb "declare". To use the verb in the sentence, we will need to make quite a few changes. The simplest way to do it is by using the active voice, which makes "collector" the new subject and demands the use of a verb to express the action of declaring. With that in mind, we can reframe the sentence in the following manner:
The collector declared the local holiday.
The verb "declared" is in the past form because the original sentence also used a past structure.
A. Third person omniscient
