I find all of the answers pretty neutral (that is, giving only facts, no judgements) except on sentence 3: this is because of the word "sharply".
It seems that the author of this sentence makes a judgement about the split: that they're very split, that their argument was very intense. It seems like a judgement to me more than the other sentences.
<span>1) Viola enters Orsino's court dressed as a male.
</span><span>2) Olivia asks Cesario about his parentage.
</span>3) <span>Malvolio makes a fool of himself in front of Olivia.
</span>4) <span>Sebastian reveals to Antonio that he has a twin sister.
</span>5) Feste returns the ring to Cesario that Orsino had given to Olivia.
6) <span>Antonio offers to take Cesario's place in the duel.</span>
In this case, the main sentence has an embedded clause at the end:
"<em>I think </em><em>that ’twixt the negroes of the South and the women at the North, all talking about rights, the white men will be in a fix pretty soon</em><em>.</em>" (embedded clause in bold.)
This embedded sentence is <u>complex</u> as it has one independent clause ("<em>...the white men will be in a fix pretty soon.</em>") and a dependent clause ("<em>...that 'twixt the negroes of the South and the women at the North...</em>")
The main sentence presents a simple syntactic pattern: S.V.O. (Subject-Verb-Object), as it contains a mono-transitive verb ("<em>think</em>") which requires a direct object following it ("<em>that...</em>"). The subject of the sentence is the personal pronoun "<em>I</em>". This S.V.O. pattern is present in sentences much simpler, such as "<em>I think this</em>" or "<em>I like that.</em>"
C) Something to learn from
