No, it does not have enough factual information
The answer is: dangling modifier.
Dangling modifiers are separate from the word they modify, resulting in ambiguity, confusion or nonsense. In the example sentence, it is not clear which animal is walking the wire - whether the dog or the squirrel. Supposing the squirrel (which is about to fall) is walking the wire, a correct version of the sentence would be:
My dog waited for the squirrel to fall, which was walking the wire.
<span>B. Bored with ranch life, Elisa longs for adventure.</span>
It is because there is little work, and they need something to keep them occupied
Answer:
His mission was to administer the consolations of
religion to any of the prostrate figures in whom there might yet linger a spark of life.
Explanation:
this sentence is saying that after the battle lots of people were dead but this mans job was to go looking for people who still might have a chance to live but realistically there was no one left so that just shows that the aftermath of a battle can be worse than the battle itself.
narrator ADDRESSES the reader - first-person
narrator is detached observer WITHOUT complete knowledge - third-person
narrator who is a PARTICIPANT with LIMITED knowledge - second-person
I capitalized some words so that you can tie the definition with the term.
