Answer:
Tim had a skateboard made for him
Once a month my car is washed by someone
The students are told by the teacher to clean the blackboard
Our car was serviced by a mechanic at the garage
All of Alan's clothes are washed by his mom
The statement that appeals to pathos, effectively support Nye’s purpose include option D: The anecdote uses logical evidence, such as facts and statistics, to explain why heritage is important.
<h3>
What is the term Speaking Arabic about?</h3>
In this excerpt from "Speaking Arabic", the author reveals the narrator's view on heritage by presenting dialogue that includes a contrasting perspective .
Firstly, the narrator describes the fair, in which stands from different countries, like Germany and Mexico can be found. This represents how heritage can exists even when one is not in his home country.
And on the other hand, the narrator presents an American boy, who, even when living in his own country, feels lonely because he has "no heritage".
Therefore, correct option is D.
Learn more about Speaking Arabic, refer to the link:
brainly.com/question/15110235
Answer:
She is best known for her first novel
Explanation:
She is best known for her first novel, The House on Mango Street (1983), and her subsequent short story collection Woman Hollering Creek and Other Stories (1991)
Answer:
It fails to support its claim with specific, credible evidence and uses a disrespectful tone.
Explanation:
When giving arguments in favor or against a specific subject, they must be supported by reason and logic as well as credible evidence that can be compared with reality. They also need to be coherent with the things you are stating, this has to be done in a respectful tone as you are open to the idea of others comments and counterarguments. You are supposed to show you are right with these arguments, not by insulting or despising others.
In my opinion, this excerpt fails in both. It is not respectful and it's arguments are not strong enough.
He states that there is not proof of who is right or wrong on the debate adressed, he needs to support this with evidence. Who states that?
He the concludes that "no valid judgment can be made for everyone on whether smartphones should be banned from teens." This seems as an opinion based on his own reasoning.
After this, he starts making judgments about the people supporting the restriction, calling them naïve. This is not polite or useful. As I said, this is not based on evidence, he is contradicting himself as he stated in the first lines that there was no evidence of who was rigth or wrong.
The next lines express just his opinions based on his values and thoughts, evidence to support them is never presented.
