Answer: Because Sweet Nothings is an expository piece of writing.
Explanation:
Kowalski, the author of Sweet Nothings presents evidence to support weight loss and refute weight loss because her writing is an expository piece of writing.
An expository piece of writing just as the name implies is one that exposes readers to a particular idea or topic. It’s purpose is to inform about and describe a particular subject or idea.
Kowalski, the author of Sweet Nothings may have been expected to stick to a particular side of the subject, that is either present evidence that supports weight loss or the one that refutes weight loss.
Instead, she presented both because her writing is an expository piece informing her readers about the both the advantages and disadvantages of weight loss.
Answer This words explain that he is hurted he is having a hard life with there life and love and he's sad on what's happening right now in his life. Explanation: Hope this helps if it's wrong srry :)
Answer:
D
Explanation:
It shows that the president sucks with economy
It was called the Weimer Republic. It was a democratic republic resembling (somewhat) the same sort of government the United States has. It failed for a number of reasons.
The first and most important was that the German population felt they had been sold down the drain. They felt that their government had failed them the moment the Versailles treaty was signed. There were many riots and uprisings that happened during the Republic. It was chaotic in Germany and unstable.
This anger that people felt had all the earmarks of "DO SOMETHING" and do it now. That psychology led to the rise of Hitler, although it was slow in coming. The treaty of Versailles had to be rewritten a couple of times simply because Germany was not paying. The terms were just too steep, but even if they were much more lenient, it wouldn't have made much difference. Germany was just too angry internally.
I would pick the last one, but it is awfully simplistic.
Incomplete question. Full question read:
<em>Reading that "Tom kicked the ball into the net with no time to spare" and inferring that he is playing soccer is an inference of</em><em>:</em>
A. action
B. instrumentation
C. time
D. location
Answer:
<u>A. action</u>
Explanation:
Remember, to<em> 'infer' </em>could also mean to conclude based on the facts/data provided.
Hence, inferring from the "action" carried out by Tom would logically lead us to the conclusion that <em>he is playing soccer. </em>Why? <u>Because engaging in the game of soccer involves the action of kicking a ball into the net quickly. </u>
