The verb phrase is "will go." I hope this helps
Answer:
The story of Pride and Prejudice is structured in a chronological order. The protagonist, Elizabeth Bennet, is the central character in the story, and the central conflict is upon her attempt to find a fitting marriage despite the difficulties posed by societal customs and her own lack of self-awareness. She comes with a lot of enemies who stand in the way of a happy marriage. These antagonists are divided into two categories. The first are the characters who try to persuade Elizabeth to marry the wrong man, therefore jeopardizing her future happiness. Mrs. Bennet (who does not comprehend the type of marriage her daughter desires and believes Elizabeth should lower her standards) and Mr. Collins (who tries to persuade Elizabeth to accept a marriage that would never work out) are among them.please her). The characters that want to hinder Elizabeth's marriage to Darcy, such as Miss Bingley and Lady Catherine de Bourgh, make up the second set of enemies. At times, Elizabeth plays the role of her own opponent. Her obstinacy and reluctance to see that Darcy is a wonderful match for her pushes her further away from her goal of happiness rather than closer to it.
Sometimes, sunset can be viewed as "romantic". If the author wants to build a relationship the sunset is used as a pathetic fallacy (when the weather matches the mood). The sunset refers to love which will overall build their relationship.
Answer:
We have been asked not to have drama club meetings in the library common area. I say, how dare they restrict our freedom of speech! - straw man argument
I may not have a degree from my fancy college, but I know what’s right. - hasty generalization
I started playing Keno at six. You have to start young to get good at it. - ad homonym
My opponent is no patriot. Plain folks fallacy
Either you’re with us, or you’re against us. -either Dash or reasoning
Explanation:
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.
