Answer:
Reasonable Voice
Explanation:
Go for the reasonable voice! Final authority is always great, but being the reasonable one is going to be your best bet. You'll want people to hear you out on your opinion in the best way possible!
b) The National Collegiate Athletic Association, or NCAA, earned a staggering $1 billion in 2017, and college athletes will never see a penny of that profit.
Option B is the best hook for an argument in favor of paying college athletes. A hook is the first sentence or two of the essay that gets the reader interested in the topic of the essay. In this hook, the author provides startling data to hook the audience. People may want to better understand what the NCAA does with all that money. It's also obvious this hook what the author's stance is on the topic. The use of the word "staggering" and "never" set the tone that author is appalled by this. Option A is too vague. So what if they make a lot of money...good for them. Or the audience might already know it. Why would they then want to read the essay. Option D has a similar problem. The question is a yes or no answer. The audience says no so what then, or even if they say yes. Where does the essay go from there? A hook should entice the audience and make them want more.
Answer:
Reality
Explanation:
Both poems "A Contribution to Statistics" and "And Yet the Books" both depict different events in the middle of the poem, but in the end imply that there is something constant which is reality. Both display smaller fragments of events, stories, or examples, but the last lines of how stories and ideas go, and how numbers give statistics to some instances, give the general idea that the ups and downs of the poem all end up to one final reality.
B) The word qhal, every world, and qhalur
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
This would be my letter to the author of "Brother in the Land," discussing the positive and negative aspects of the play script.
Dear Mr. Swindells,
I have just read your interesting book "Brother in the Land."
As an avid reader of your work, I would like to share the following comments about your futuristic novel.
First, the positives.
It really caught my attention for the futuristic scenarios described in the story.
The location of the novel, norther England after the nuclear explosion was a good place to develop the story.
Danny, the teenage boy and the main character of the story, is well portrayed.
The Negatives.
The story is not so original. There have been other authors that have written about future catastrophic scenarios due to a nuclear war.
The terror described in the story could be more realistic about what could have happened in a real situation. I think sometimes some exaggerations do not pay the story a good service.
Thank you very much for your work that I respect it so much.
Sincerely,