Answer:
Explanation:
There are lots of language conventions, or techniques, used in this short story. I've provided some examples below. I hope you find the examples helpful.
I was walking to the nearest phone booth to call the landlady, when I heard that kettle's horrific scream behind me.
In this first example, the author has used personification (giving human characteristics to an inanimate object) to describe the kettle as "screaming." Using personification like this is an effective way of conveying the narrator's feelings, as those feelings seem to be manifested in her perceptions of the environment around her. The demonstrative pronoun "that" in this particular quote also attributes a special significance to this kettle, implying that it has already been the cause of some upset. The kettle is personified throughout the story, often as "that evil kettle" or "the demonic kettle." In fact the repetition (another common language convention in literature) of the personification arguably.
There is no ethical reason on why humans should kill prymairts it’s not part of the cycle of life
Sudden Insight. The character has had a realization of something important.
Constructive feedback reinforces positive behavior and offers a critique in a direct but respectful way. If given in a negative or rude way, criticism might not only hurt the feelings of the receiver but also reinforce negative behavior. Blending praise and suggestions make the feedback polite and efficient.
In the excerpt, the two parts that contain constructive feedback are:
<em>'My favorite part of the essay was when you described your grandmother's reaction after finding the frog in her purse because it was so funny and so vivid.'</em>
<em>'I would suggest working on word choice, since you used the same words many times in the essay. Use a thesaurus to find synonyms if you need to.'</em>
The first section reinforces positive behavior by offering a compliment while the second one offers a suggestion for improvement.
The other sections criticize his friend's paper in a negative way, making harsh comments without offering any suggestions or solutions to the flaws found.
Answer:
I believe it was written in 1955 or 1956 or around that time.
Explanation:
(I looked it up just to make sure I was correct and it is 1955)
