The sentence that suggests the narrator does not closely monitor Bar.tleby's performance after hiring him is given below.
<h3>What is the evidence that the lawyer didn't do thorough background checks on Bar.tleby?</h3>
The textual evidence is as follows;
"The Lawyer asks him: "What earthly right have you to stay here? Do you pay any rent? Do you pay any taxes? Or is this property yours?"
Bar.tleby makes no response, and the Lawyer becomes resigned to the idea that Bar.tleby will simply haunt his office, doing nothing.
The Lawyer believes he is doing a good, Christian thing by allowing Bar.tleby to continue existing in his office."
<h3>Who is Bar.tleby?</h3>
From the text "Bar.tleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall Street", Bar.tleby is an old scrivener at The Lawyer's office, Turkey. He is cheerful and productive until midday, when he gets dru.nk, grumpy, and basically worth.less.
We never discover his full name since The Lawyer only refers to him by his nickname. A twelve-year-old assistant in the legal office.
Learn more about narrator:
brainly.com/question/28223605
#SPJ1
The option that identifies the context clue that would be most helpful in determining the meaning of the underlined word is remarkable no so much for...as for their senseless brutality, here we have a contrast with the use of the word as between the descriptions, senseless brutality is a negative description and since we are talking about the use of comparison the meaning of munificence has to be positive according to the context.
In fact, munificence is a positive word it is a synonym of generosity, in this way the expression remarkable no so much for...as for their senseless brutality is the clue that helps you understand the meaning of the word.
The other options are not correct because they don't have a direct connection with the specific word we want to understand.
The sentence that can be removed <u>without affecting the explanation</u> is "<em>In the 1800s, the United States was still a very young nation, trying to solidify its identity</em>."
The reason this sentence can be removed is that it does not offer any necessary information to the explanation. The passage is about how technology leads to bigger cities. This information is conveyed just as efficiently without the need for the first sentence.
Rather than serving to offer information, the first sentence in the passage serves as a sort of <u>introduction</u> to the text. The very next sentence can just as easily serve as an intro to the passage while providing context for the development of early technology that led to the industrial revolution.
For these reasons, the sentence "<em>In the 1800s, the United States was still a very young nation, trying to solidify its identity</em>." can easily be removed from the passage <u>without affecting</u> the explanation.
To learn more visit:
brainly.com/question/816588?referrer=searchResults
What’s sentence you need to know the answer?
