This is a predicate adjective, as it immediately follows a copulative (=linking) verb "to grow". If it said - The tall grass, then "tall" would be nominative. This way it isn't, it is a predicative adjective.
Walter's wife, known in the story as "Mrs. Mitty," treats Walter like an absent-minded child. She is overbearing, condescending, and critical towards Walter. But she is also Walter's link to the real world. While Walter is off in his own imagination, it is his wife or other people who bring him back to reality. This relationship of Walter's imagination (his escape from reality) and his wife's nagging (in efforts to bring him back to reality) is an uncertain "chicken and the egg" situation. We, readers, don't know if Walter's imagination is what caused his wife to become the practical, reality-based wife that she is or if Walter uses his imagination as an escape from his overbearing wife. Even if we knew which came first (Walter being absent-minded or his wife being condescending), it is just as likely that over the course of their marriage, Walter's and his wife's behaviors fed off of each other; and therefore, who started the whole cycle is somewhat irrelevant.
At the end of the story, when Mrs. Mitty returns from her appointment, Walter says, "Things close in." This is noted as a vague statement but could be interpreted to illustrate how Walter feels about the real world. He feels trapped and therefore resorts to fantasies in order to escape from that trapped feeling. One could sympathize with Mrs. Mitty, knowing that Walter is always absent-minded to the point of being careless. On the other hand, one could sympathize with Walter. Even when Walter tells her he was thinking, a valid excuse, she dismisses it as a fever:
"I was thinking," said Walter Mitty. "Does it ever occur to you that I am sometimes thinking?" She looked at him. "I'm going to take your temperature when I get you home," she said.
ANSWER: <span>B) This latest attack is yet another in a long line of lies from the lunatics in the opposing party.
EXPLANATION:
-Inflammatory Language contains statements which cause anger, excitement, or unnecessary wording that might trigger a person or certain group of people.
-All the other choices keep their statements ranging from neutral to somewhat irritating, but Answer B) is savage (calling the opposing party lunatics, dang...)
Hope this Helps!</span>
Okonkwo has a very bad temper and his three wives are living in fear with him. An analysis of Okonkwo's psychology shows that his aggression is rooted from a subconscious fear of being a failure like his father. He hates his father's ideals and principles of idleness and gentleness. Since Okonkwo is consumed with fear of becoming like his father, he beats and reprimands his <span>twelve-year-old son named Nwoye out of concern that his son will become lazy.</span>
Answer: sorry it's so much
Explanation:
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.
From its magisterial opening phrase, which sets the American Revolution within the whole "course of human events," to its assertion that "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" entitle America to a "separate and equal station among the powers of the earth," to its quest for sanction from "the opinions of mankind," the introduction elevates the quarrel with England from a petty political dispute to a major event in the grand sweep of history.
Following this tradition, in July 1775 the Continental Congress issued its own Declaration Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms. When, a year later, Congress decided the colonies could no longer retain their liberty within the British empire, it adhered to a long-established rhetorical convention by describing independence as a matter of absolute and inescapable necessity.6 Indeed, the notion of necessity was so important that in addition to appearing in the introduction of the Declaration, it was invoked twice more at crucial junctures in the rest of the text and appeared frequently in other congressional papers after July 4, 1776.7
If America and Great Britain were seen as one people, Congress could not justify revolution against the British government for the simple reason that the body of the people did not support the American cause.
This is achieved partly by the latent chronological progression of thought, in which the reader is moved from the creation of mankind to the institution of government, to the throwing off of government when it fails to protect the people's unalienable rights, to the creation of a new government that will better secure the people's safety and happiness.
