Answer:
"The Yellow Wallpaper" is a short story by Charlotte Perkins Gilman which was published in 1892. The narration tells us about a woman (the main narrator) whose loving husband John, a physician, takes them both to a mansion home where the two of them are to stay during the summer months until she gets better from her "depressive" condition, as her husband says it. The two end up establishing themselves not on the first floor for the house, but rather on the second-floor nursery room because, according to John, it has all the conditions that are necessary for his wife to heal. Apart from the opennes, airiness and the amount of windows on the place where John basically locks his wife, we are told of two pretty unique features; the first, that all the windows are barred and the walls have interspersed rings in them, and also, that the room is papered with a yellow pattern that at first the narrator hates for its color and design, but that soon becomes the center of attention, and the main driver of the events that develop in the story.
It must be remembered that the narrator liked to write, and according to John had too much of a creative imagination that could be the reason why she was always tired and sick. As the story progressses the color of the paper, and the pattern of it, go from being a symbol of domestication and tradition for women (the case of the narrator being a wife and not being allowed to be anything else), to becoming a mysterious place where the narrator finds almost an alternative universe where a woman, much like her, seeks to break free of that traditional and standardized pattern. So, the answer to the questions would be:
1. No, the color and the pattern were the symbol of what was expected of women, of tradition and eestablished roles in society. If this pattern had been changed, then maybe the narrator would not have grown interested in studying beyond what she at first hated to find what lay beneath.
2. The wallpaper is described by the narrator as hideous, and in pretty bad shape, almost dirty and mistreated. Then, she starts to analyze it more and more and realize that that which at first she hated has now become appealing and interesting to her. It is the color yellow, and the shabbiness of the paper that first invites the narrator to try and look beyond that ugliness to find what lies beneath. This is why sets off the events of the story. So again the color could not have changed.
Family economics applies basic economic concepts such as production, division of labor, distribution, and decision making to the study of the family. Using economic analysis it tries to explain outcomes unique to family—such as marriage, the decision to have children, fertility, polygamy, time devoted to domestic production, and dowry payments.
The family, although recognized as fundamental from Adam Smith onward, received little systematic treatment in economics before the 1960s. Important exceptions are Thomas Robert Malthus' model of population growth[1] and Friedrich Engels'[2] pioneering work on the structure of family, the latter being often mentioned in Marxist and feminist economics. Since the 1960s, family economics has developed within mainstream economics, propelled by the new home economics started by Gary Becker, Jacob Mincer, and their students.[3]Standard themes include:
fertility and the demand for children in developed and developing countries[4]
child health and mortality[5]
interrelation and trade-off of 'quantity' and 'quality' of children through investment of time and other resources of parents[6][7][8]
altruism in the family, including the rotten kid theorem[9]
sexual division of labor, intra-household bargaining, and the household production function.[
mate selection,search costs, marriage, divorce, and imperfect information
family organization, background, and opportunities for children[
intergenerational mobility and inequality,[14] including the bequest motive.[
human capital, social security, and the rise and fall of families
macroeconomics of the family.
Several surveys, treatises, and handbooks are available on the subject
Answer:I noticed a smile by the lady at the counter as soon as I stepped into the door
Explanation:
This non verbal behaviour makes one feels welcomed and it gives a sense of hope that the service one will receive is going to be friendly.
My thoughts is if everyone provided their service with smile on their face more customers will feel comfortable coming back to that shop or place again.
Life can be too stressful sometimes but a smile in someone's face can lighten up your world for just that second or moment and it's a great feeling one will desire to have.
They both start around the year 2000 BCE, four millennia ago, a bit later than Egypt and Sumer (Babylonia).
The first empires in India started around the Vedic period (1500-800 BCE). The Vedas are some of the oldest mythological texts in history. They laid the principles of Hinduism (which is one of the major religions even nowadays) and traditional Hindu philosophy. Since then, a series of different empires have ruled over the Indian subcontinent for more than three thousand years, among great wars and shifts in religion. Some examples are the Mauryan empire (321-185 BCE) or the Chola empire (850-1279 CE).
The Xia dynasty (2070-1600 BCE) was the first in ancient China. Since then, great emperors have ruled over the whole territory, but the country has also split apart into feudal kingdoms a lot of times, and subjected by foreign invaders like the Mongols. Some of the most important dynasties were the Tang Dynasty (618-907 CE) which flourished due to commerce, the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644 CE) a brilliant period for the arts, or the Qing Dynasty (1644-1912 CE) which lasted until the arrival of communism and gives us an idea of the extraordinary continuity of Chinese tradition and political system. Confucianism and Taoism were ancient moral and religious teachings that shaped Chinese society. Both China and India were strongly influenced by Buddhism.
(Note: Dates by the Encyclopedia Britannica)
Per capita can take the place of saying “per person” in any statistical observances. In most cases, the phrase is used in relation to economic data or reporting, but it can also be used in almost any other occurrence of population description.
