A foil is the near complete opposite of the main character (whichever character they want you to find a foil for).
Rainsford and Whitney were good hunting friends with numerous similar interests. They could not be foils because of how close in similarity they were. Even when they disagreed on how animals felt about being hunted, Whitney seemed open to and intrigued by Rainsford's points and way of thinking.
Ivan is a near irrelevant character, being a mere Cossack who follows whatever General Zaroff says. He is mindless and has almost zero traits to even compare to Rainsford, let alone any traits aside from a mindless follower to begin with.
The answer would be General Zaroff. This is almost like the cliche protagonist vs antagonist foil. Both of them are hunters, but different kinds. Zaroff got bored with animals and wanted to hunt human people instead, whereas Rainsford had enjoyed the thrill of an animal hunt and thinks that the hunting of people is murder. Zaroff is more heartless and cold, a killer, if you will. Rainsford seems to think highly of actual people, and had no interest in playing Zaroff's game.
Explanation:
the flash computer is fast AS the xyz model is just as fast
majid is a smart young man and so as his brother nasr
The necklace is ironic in the fact that when the necklace is borrowed it is believed to be a real diamond necklace. When she loses the "diamond necklace" she works very long to repay the person she borrowed from because she thinks the necklace she lost was worth much money. When she gives the money to the person she borrowed from and confesses that she lost it she was told that the necklace was a fake and that she worried and worked for many years over nothing. This is an example of situational irony. She thought the necklace was worth very much money when it was really only worth very little
<span>Q1: The ability of an ecosystem to recover from damage.
In the text, it says "the resiliency of the reefs". From this we know that resiliency is a trait that the reefs have. In the next sentence, we see the context clues that define resiliency when it states "reefs bounce back-even flourish." When someone or something bounces back it recovers and returns to it's previous state.
Q2: to inform readers about how the coral reefs are being destroyed AND to convince readers that practices that destroy coral reefs must be stopped.
It is a "Check All That Apply" so more than one answer can be chosen. The passage title is "Save the Coral Reefs" and the selection ends with the sentence "More can be done now to help the coral reefs bounce back". These clues tell the reader that the author's purpose is to save the reefs. In order to do this the author needs to first explain how the reefs are being destroyed. Then convince readers to save the reefs by stopping the practices that destroy them.
Q3: "could help save" and "unsubstantiated risks".
It is important to pay attention to the question here. It is asking for phrases that support safety - not necessarily nutrition. A pixie stick is safe to eat, but not nutritious. The phrase "could help save" supports the idea that it is safe because it is being defined as possibly life and eye-saving. "Unsubstantiated risks" also shows safety because it state that any risks have not been proven and are therefore unfounded. Some of the other phrases such as "more vitamin A" and "more nutritious" support the argument that the food is healthier but are not used to specifically explain how safe it is.</span>
Option 1:
Measuring the heights of every fiftieth person on the school roster to determine the average heights of the boys in the school
Comment: this might not be a good idea for fairness as we only wish to determine average height of the boys. Taking a group of 50 people randomly, might not give us the same number of boys every time.
Option 2:
Calling every third person on the soccer team’s roster to determine how many of the team members have completed their fundraising assignment
Comment: The context doesn't seem to need a sampling. The number of players in a soccer team is considerably small. We can find exact data by asking in person.
Option 3:
Observing every person walking down Main Street at 5 p.m. one evening to determine the percentage of people who wear glasses
Comment: To get a more accurate result and fairer sampling, the period of observing could have been longer, for example, observing for 12 hours on that day, or an alternative is to observe at 5 pm for 7 days in a row. It could happen that no one walking down the Main street precisely at 5 pm wears glasses, or it could happen the other way around.
Option 4:
Sending a confidential e-mail survey to every one-hundredth parent in the school district to determine the overall satisfaction of the residents of the town taking a poll in the lunch room (where all students currently have to eat lunch) to determine the number of students who want to be able to leave campus during lunch.
Comment: This sampling does fairly represent the population, although it might be an idea to scale down the sample population, i.e. every fiftieth parent.
Answer: Option 4
