Answer: She feels confident about continuing on to Kans.
Explanation:
This is the correct answer because, in the end, she is saying that "Hmmph. Well, we've come this far. We'll just have to go on without him."
She feels confident about it even though she does not know how to get there without the gu( that is why the second statement is false). She does not want to return to Louisiana with her family, she wants to continue the journey and that is why the first statement is also false.
The third statement is false because she is not angry at Nate, she is angry at the guru because he stole their money and disappear.
I believe the thesis in this is actually the first sentence considering the rest of the story talks about that first sentence.
In Chaucer´s Canterbury the The Friar's Tale, a sense of irony is predominant. The exchanges affect the portrayal of the pilgrims in that we understand how Chaucer satirizes the characters. He tells us a plenty of information about practically all of them.
As a matter of fact, he seems to know details and events that he would be impossible have if he were meeting them for the first time. Many of the pilgrims do not deserve respect, but Chaucer never overtly condemns them. It is just an apparently a way of discrediting. For example, We learn much of the negative traits of the summoners only by understanding his ironic style.
First off they are showing off respect to the next coming and I think it after every leader has finished they’re term they should all attend it