1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
MrRissso [65]
3 years ago
14

Read the sentence. At the dig, bread and butter _____ served, and every man and woman _____ hungry. Which pair of verb forms cor

rectly completes the sentence? were, was was, were was, was were, were
English
2 answers:
irina1246 [14]3 years ago
7 0

In the subject-verb agreement, the subject and the verb should agree with each other in number that is singular or plural. Therefore,  the subject is plural then the verb form is plural and if the subject is singular then the verb form is singular.

Therefore, pair of verb which correctly completes the sentence is 'was, was' written as,

At the dig, bread and butter was served, and every man and woman was hungry.

Since in the sentence above, bread and butter are two objects and plural, but the butter and bread being in singular form, verb agree with the subject and hence is written in singular form 'was.'

BigorU [14]3 years ago
3 0
The answers in the blankAt the dig, bread and butter _____ served, and every man and woman _____ hungry.
would be was,were


when you talk about noun and verb agreement, you will consider the nound bread and butter which is conaidered as singular. so the verb would he singular also. and man and woman will be taken as two different nouns so it would be plural.
You might be interested in
Match each figure of speech with its definition.
bogdanovich [222]

Answer: View Explanation...

Explanation:

Personification- B) Nonliving or nonhuman things are given human characteristics or abilities, Alliteration- E) Repetition of an initial consonant sound to create rhythm, Simile- D) A comparison of two unlike things that uses "like" or "as", Hyperbole- C) A figure of speech that uses exaggeration for emphasis, Metaphor- A) A comparison of two unlike things that does not use comparison words

4 0
2 years ago
Comment on the surprise ending of the Last Leaf
Juli2301 [7.4K]

‘The Last Leaf’, first published in O Henry’s collection ‘The Trimmed Lamp’, is quite a moving story that cherishes the treasury of life and the existence of faith and hope. While the story is set in Greenwich village, New York, it speaks volumes on the many battles humans strife through their journey of life.

The story presents the life of three struggling artists – Sue (who was from Maine), Johnsy (who was from California) and old Behrman. They live an impoverished life in an artists’ colony in Greenwich village. It is an area marked by low rents. Thus we understand that they belong to the lower strata of the society and strive hard for success while hoping to make it big one day. They understand each other's fate very well and yet support each other even at the cost of their own life. They may be impoverished but their lives are splendid. The notion of friendship and self-sacrifice is the central idea of the story and keeps the reader hooked till the end.

The story commences in Sue and Johnsy’s jointly owned apartment, that is at the top of an old three-story brick house, in an artists’ colony of Greenwich village. The two friends also use this apartment as their studio.

In the month of November, Johnsy comes down with a serious attack of pneumonia. The disease has a bad reputation in this village and seems to have taken several lives. When Sue calls for the doctor, she is told that her friend Johnsy has slim chances of survival. This was not because of her physical illness, but more because Johnsy had foolishly associated her chances of survival to that of the falling leaves of the ivy-tree.

 We are then introduced to Behrman, an old artist who was way past sixty years in age. He lived on the ground floor of the same apartment as that of Sue and Johnsy. He comes forward to help Sue in saving Johnsy’s life.

The story while maintaining the surprise elements, ends with a sting in the tail. Throughout the story, we read that Johnsy was ill and was expected to die with the fall of the last leaf. However, Behrman who paints the last leaf on the wall and battles the stormy night dies of pneumonia. Behrman was successful both in painting his masterpiece and in saving Johnsy’s life. Though Behrman appears once and speaks only twice in the story, his affection for Johnsy and Sue is well manifested in the story through his sacrifice. He thus becomes the very epitome of the theme of the story that self-sacrifice through love for others achieves happiness. The unexpected ending not only creates hope for other artists like Behrman but also recognizes him as a typical O Henry hero.  

4 0
3 years ago
In a plane, if a line is perpendicular to one of two parallel lines, then it is perpendicular to the other line also.
dlinn [17]

The definition provided in the question refers to the Perpendicular Transversal Theorem about lines, as stated in option D and further explained below.

<h3>What is the Perpendicular Transversal Theorem about?</h3>

Imagine we have two parallel lines in a plane. Now, we draw another line that is perpendicular to one of them. According to the Perpendicular Transversal Theorem, this line will be perpendicular to both lines, since they are parallel.

The explanation above is the same as the definition provided in the question. Therefore, we can conclude that the correct answer is Perpendicular Transversal Theorem, option D.

Learn more about parallel lines here:

brainly.com/question/1698138

#SPJ1

5 0
2 years ago
Write an INFORMATIVE ESSAY about the movie Coraline
Taya2010 [7]

Neil Gaiman’s Coraline introduces the story’s antagonist far before that very antagonist’s evil intentions are revealed. In the novel, a young girl Coraline has just moved into an old home. She feels ignored by her parents who are too busy working to pay attention to her. When she stumbles upon the door that leads to her other Mother, who has excessive amounts of time to spend with Coraline, it appears to Coraline that her wishes had been answered. The other Mother uses manipulation in order to ease Coraline’s worries regarding the usual situation she finds herself in. Though Coraline is quick to feel unsafe within her other Mother’s household, she is forced to return in order to save her parents. While the other Mother has violent intentions, she primarily relies on manipulation and exploiting negative feelings children feel towards their parents in order to achieve her goals. Though the other Mother plays the role of villain, it is from her that Coraline learns to appreciate her own family more.

When attempting to persuade Coraline to join the other family, her other Mother focuses on two main issues Coraline has with her parents. The first is the amount of time they spend with her. Though not specifically stated in the book, it is clear the Coraline is frustrated with her parents for not having time to play with her. During her first rainy day, Coraline quickly runs out of things to do and tells both her parents she is bored. Rather than engaging with her, as Coraline would like, both parents dismiss her with suggestions like reading a book, or counting all the doors in the house. Neither of these activates hold Coraline’s attention long. She finds both her parents and the house dull. When venturing into the other Mother’s house, however, things are different. Coraline finds the home itself an “awful lot more interesting” (Gaiman 19) and finds more engaging activities within it, such as the rats her other Mother suggests she plays with. Coraline finds the other house a much more engaging and entertaining place to be, assisting in the other Mother’s attempt to keep Coraline there.

Coraline also finds issue with the food her family makes for her. She dislikes the recipes her father makes, insisting her should just make normal food. At the beginning of the novel, he father has made a leek and potato stew that Coraline refuses to eat. It is clear from her remarks about her father’s cooking that she dislikes the elaborate dishes he tries to create. When she visits the other house, her other Father has cooked a meal for lunch that is much simpler. The other family’s lunch was tasty chicken with no “weird things” (19) done to it. This is the family meal Coraline has envisioned her family partaking in. The other Mother has had a meal created the suit the desires of Coraline, showcasing the benefits of staying with the other mother rather than returning to her real family. By exploiting Coraline’s complaints about her home life, the other Mother attempts to persuade Coraline into remaining with her.

After Coraline successfully defeats the other Mother and returns home with her real parents, it is clear there is a change in her personality, specifically regarding her interactions with her parents. Additionally, her parents appear to interact with her different. When greeting her father for the first time since her adventure, Coraline notes that her father picks her up something he had “not done for such a long time” (75) suggesting a change in the dynamic of their relationship. While at the beginning of the novel Coraline feels ignored by her parents, she now is experiencing attention she has not had in a while. For dinner, her father has once again made a recipe. Unlike her refusal to try her father’s soup, she devours an entire slice of the homemade pizza (sans the pineapple). This shows a new appreciation for her parents. She is no longer complaining about aspects of their relationships but engaging heavily in them.

The other Mother’s manipulation of Coraline changes her perspective of her relationship with her family: the aspects of this familial relationship that Coraline disliked are the very aspects that the other Mother attempted to use against her. Rather than having Coraline chose to live with her because of the changes, Coraline instead associates the other Mother’s manipulation with her previous desires. She no longer wishes for her parents to stray heavily from their work, or to cook simpler dishes, she is happy to have the family she has.

3 0
3 years ago
How do Brutus and Mark Antony differ in their understanding of their audience, the Roman Empire?
riadik2000 [5.3K]

Answer + Explanation:

The speeches that Brutus and Mark Antony deliver differ in several ways. However, one of the most important differences they exhibit is the way in which each speaker addresses the audience.

In the case of <u>Brutus</u>, he decides to appeal to his audience's minds. He speaks in a somewhat impersonal way that suggests that he does not understand the audience deeply. Moreover, his description of the motives of the plot is dry, and it underestimates the connection that the audience felt to Julius Caesar.

On the other hand, <u>Mark Antony</u> seems to understand the crowd better. He uses emotional words that create a more personal relationship. He also focuses on the importance that Julius Caesar had for the audience. This creates a more successful and dramatic speech.

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • How does the author create an aesthetic impact in the excerpt?
    15·1 answer
  • Hear the mellow wedding bells
    11·1 answer
  • Read the passage from "Cinderella" by the Brothers Grimm.
    14·1 answer
  • List the steps of Lady Macbeth’s plan to kill King Duncan and blame it on someone else
    13·1 answer
  • Read the excerpt from Common Sense. "Some Massanello may hereafter arise, who, laying hold of popular disquietudes, may collect
    14·1 answer
  • Write a side-by-side sentence using it’s
    13·1 answer
  • True or false Bible Question
    15·2 answers
  • Please help me
    8·1 answer
  • Read the following description:
    9·1 answer
  • UNDERLINE THE PARTICIPLE OR PARTICIPIAL PHRASE IN EACH SENTENCE​
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!