Answer:
h t t p s : / / l p . s e a r c h m u l t y . c o m / n 3 / ? p = 3 1 0 4 & v e r = 4 0 1
Explanation:
put all of these thingies together and search it and then download it and then boom u got ur answer!
ANSWER: A, B, C, D
A includes an adverb of place which is "in World War 1". "World War 1" describes the verb "fight" by stating its location and is thus an adverb of place
B includes an adverb which is "usually". "usually" describes the action/verb "held" by stating how often it was "held"
C, well you know, "carefully".
D should have an adverb too if there isn't any mistake in the sentence as it has the adverb "deeply" which describes the action/verb "worried" by stating the degree of her worrying for George. NOTE: "worried" in this context is NOT an adjective
E does not have an adverb. Although it may seem like "exactly" is the adverb, "exactly" is describing "eight inches long" which is an adjective, not a verb. Therefore, there should be no adverb because the verb in this sentence, which is "said", was not described in any way.
Therefore, the answers are A, B, C and D.
I'm sorry if my answers are wrong and hopefully you can tell me why if it is...
Hope this answer helped :) Also, people should be thinking everyday, or else nothing will have meaning and our daily lives won't be able to function normally. I hope you change your mindset about that, it's really fun to learn on weekends too :)
Answer:
Hi! I would love to help you. I just need some more information about your question. :D I just need to understand your question
:D
Explanation:
Answer:
Illustration/example would go with Tells what something is; useful in all subjects
Classification/division would go with useful in Botany, biology, and anatomy classes
cause/effect would go with useful to describe how to refurnish furniture
extended definition would go with reasoning from several particular examples to establish a general principle.
inductive reasoning would go with drawing conclusions from implied information
deductive reasoning would go with fallacy in logic that assumes a cause and effect relationship because of sequence
inferences would go with drawing a particular conclusion from general premises
process analysis would go with structure used in history and science explaining reasons for certain events or phenomena
comparison/contrast would go with using a story to make a point
post hoc would go with reasoning from several particular examples to establish general principle
Explanation:
Answer:
. . . for his blood was hot and youthful and prone to boil.
Explanation:
got it right on edge