Answer:
Figurative Language
<u>Definition</u>:
- Language that contains or uses figures of speech, especially metaphors
<h2>What does 'How does the author use language to make a point' mean? </h2>
Consider language as a means of transmitting information. The author is now employing words to instruct the reader, generally through dialogue. Different dialects or methods of speech might signify social or economic standing, as well as regional cultural distinctions. In this way, The Grapes of Wrath is a great example. The author might be attempting to underline a distinction between landowners and their employees, or between two areas, or anything else... It is determined by the novel's setting and the language used. Language might relate to a specific language, such as French or Spanish, but this seems like an unreasonable description for a summer reading project.
#SPJ2
I believe the correct answer is: B) Neighborhood Leaders Request an Inquiry About Pollution.
Option B seems to be the most neutral of the given choices and doesn't change the overall meaning of the title. Option A doesn't sound neutral and options C and D change the meaning of the headline.
Answer:
1.) Because matter is made up of molecules, the behavior of matter is dictated by the behaviors of the molecules. If the molecules were different, matter would be different.
Example: water expands when it freezes
2.) Engage the audience — get them interested, give them a reason to listen. How?
Describe a scene or a character.
Tell a story.
Share a personal experience.
Relate to a recent event.
Piggyback on a previous speaker's remark or theme.
Point out something important about the audience or the current setting.
Explanation: I hope this helps :)
The right answer for the question that is being asked and shown above is that: "D. The majority opinion uses lower courts' decisions on the same case as evidence." judicial reviews in the majority opinion differ from those in the dissent is that the majority opinion uses lower courts' decisions on the same case as evidence.
Answer:
See below:
Explanation:
Separate but equal is a contradictory idea. Why must equal things be separate in the first place? Firstly, as many know, America's history with the concept has been deceptive. For example, the "colored" restrooms were poorly looked after, while the "white" bathrooms were typically well taken care of, more so than the other bathrooms anyway. The idea was that because different races cannot coexist, we should be separated but given equal resources to survive. The only reason one would legally separate races is because they believed one race to be superior in value to the others. Therefore, separate but equal is nothing but a baseless, political pacifier.
Stay cool.<3
