Answer:
well for starters he may have never even made it back to his wife because it takes a heros traits to go through all that peril and still make it home. If he didn't prove himself or have the smarts, his wife would eventually have to have married off to another man that was more suitable to rule the kingdom and Odysseus would loose everything that he owned. It was because he was a good hero that he became the king in the first place and he also survived many dangerous encounters. This includes the Cyclops, Polyphemus, Circe who almost turned him into an animal but ended up helping him instead, and then also how he returned home, claimed what was his, and killed all the suitors that had tried to takes his position and wife. Also, the fact that he was some amazing war hero who proved his worth showed that he truly deserved his positions and he wasn't questioned by anybody when he took it back. His son probably would have been used as a slave or normal warrior. Maybe even killed so that there were no possible men to take over the throne with Odysseus gone.
Explanation:
C, it’s the only one that relates to the claim.
Answer:
O Anaya structures his excerpt as an analysis, while Nye structures her excerpt as an observation.
Explanation:
In the first excerpt, Rudolfo Anaya presents a case of his friend who decided to 'remove' his heritage, his Latin background just to get accepted for a scholarship. And in this act, Anaya observes that his friend <em>"took out his native language, the poetic patois of our reality . . . took the soul out of his poetry." </em>This shows his analysis of what he saw and thinks is happening, giving his opinion.
On the other hand, Naomi Shihab Nye structures "Speaking Arabic" as an observation of what she saw. She describes the young man's declaration of wanting a heritage among the <em>"tall America trees"</em> while in a Texas fair in between the <em>"German Oom-pah Sausage Stand and the Mexican Gorditas booth".</em> The excerpt is an observation of what she saw at that time and place.
Thus, the <u>correct answer is that Anaya structures his excerpt as an analysis while Nye's is an observation.
</u>
The italicized word or phrase <em>a three-pronged </em>(if this is italicized, we cannot possibly know) is attributive, as it is an adjective to describe the plan.
