Since the <em>Romantic </em>literature had set as its goal the "victory" or predominance of Man over Nature, its language tended to be somewhat triumphalistic (some would say hyperbolic) when it was about how human beings were deployed. Romanticism introduced an long-term project at a time when important scientific milestones were achieved, and also when most of modern nations and States were being founded, thus taking a voice which was very proud of national virtues, some of them legendary, part of folklore or popular culture (but belonging to a national heritage rather than coming from a more traditional stem). Neoclassicist literature was a new take on the Greek-Roman Classics, intending to bring them back into the mainstream and most of the times not fulfilling the feat. Based on this, Neoclassicist language could be felt as overblown. In a way, Romanticism was a look into the future (let us think of <em>Frankenstein </em>a very experimental novel for its time) whereas Neoclasicism very much represented a reaction to such future.
Answer:
Scientists found that the genes of the ancient American dogs were similar to the genes of dogs born in Europe and Asia.
Explanation:
Makes sense
