Answer:
Answer of Question 1:
D. It acts as the falling action of the story by showing what happens to the person who wins the lottery.
Answer of Question 2:
C. Tessie’s obviously negative view of the lottery after she wins she conflicts with the readers’ previous view of the lottery as rather mundane to create suspense about why Tessie gets so upset.
Explanation:
Answer 1:
In “The Lottery” (1949) by Shirley Jackson, when Tessie Hutchinson comes in the center of a cleared space, the conflict is about to resolve. So it is falling action of the story.
Falling Action is defined as the part of a story right after the climax and before the very end. It resolves all the conflicts of the story and wraps up the narrative.
Falling action should not be confused with resolution or denouement of a story which is the end of the story. During falling action the conflict is being resolved, while at resolution the conflict has been resolved.
Answer 2:
The title of the story, the mention of square between bank and post office, the excitement among children, women and men of the village – all make readers view lottery as a sort of cash prize. The reader first has a slight conflict by reading about stones in the start of the story. But he/she (the reader) ignores it to give it any importance. The real conflict arises when Tessie protests at the result of the lottery when she wins it (or in fact loses it).
Answer:
this perspective is inaccurate because characters using informal language doesn’t mean that they’re unintelligent.
Explanation:
it’s the same thing for formal language. there’s a time and place for both informal and formal language. if a bunch of characters are friends and hanging out, then they’d want to use informal language with each other. informal language can also be more realistic to use for characters. for example if all characters in a book are in high school, it would be really unrealistic to have all of them use formal language and walking around talking like they're in a job interview.
those critics are assuming that informal language = unintelligent characters when that is just not true. characters can be intelligent and still use informal language because that’s normal for them or they’re in a place with people where using informal language is better.
the ratio of analysis to evidence is analysis/ratio it is always the analysis before the evidence
Good result : Gregor now has food to eat
Bad result : Gregor's father is now in jail for abuse
