Answer:
this perspective is inaccurate because characters using informal language doesn’t mean that they’re unintelligent.
Explanation:
it’s the same thing for formal language. there’s a time and place for both informal and formal language. if a bunch of characters are friends and hanging out, then they’d want to use informal language with each other. informal language can also be more realistic to use for characters. for example if all characters in a book are in high school, it would be really unrealistic to have all of them use formal language and walking around talking like they're in a job interview.
those critics are assuming that informal language = unintelligent characters when that is just not true. characters can be intelligent and still use informal language because that’s normal for them or they’re in a place with people where using informal language is better.
I do not believe a comma is necessary in this sentence at all. In fact, if you were to insert a comma after the word grazed (as you maybe tempted to do) it could change the meaning of the sentence. If you meant the lions were oblivious of the presence of the gazelles, you would insert a comma after grazed. But if you meant the gazelles were oblivious of the presence of the lions, you would leave the comma out.
The correct option is B.
In the question given above, you are to develop an essay that is in favor of vegetable farming. The two objects that are been compared here are vegetables and lawns. Thus, any resource that will be used in supporting your argument must be one that deals with the relationships, benefits and the demerits that exist between keeping a front lawn and keeping a vegetable garden. Looking at all the options given above, it is only option B that expresses the relationship between the two.
