Answer:
1. Acumen most likely means “an ability to make good and wise decisions"
2. Tempestuous most likely means “explosive"
3. Auspicious most likely means “favorable"
Explanation:
The given words from the passage means the following:
Acumen - it most likely mean that the Senator had the ability to make good decisions or judgments.
Temptestuous - it most likely mean that the Senator wasn't "explosive" in anger.
Auspicious - it most likely mean that the Senator was favorable.
If these are your choices, then C. The full scholarship I received for college is O.K., I guess. is the answer.
A. I just love it when my baby brother wakes me up crying at all hours of the night!
B. I was so excited about the news that I screamed for hours!
C. The full scholarship I received for college is O.K., I guess.
D. My sister first met her husband in Africa, even though he grew up a block away from us in Cleveland.
I belive the correct answers are: A and C
"Sweating in the heat, we had lost the whole day, dreading to be buried alive in the drifting sand."
"Sand in the scanty food, sand in the brackish water--water that was drunk lukewarm from a clammy, loathsome water skin."
Hope it helps
The Diamond Necklace is a story written by Guy de Maupassant. It was published in 1884 on the French newspaper "Le Gaulois". In this story Maupassant, as in most of his work, sets a critic about burgess and their excesses and ambition
The main character of the story, Mathilde, dreams of becoming a Dame in the French privileged society. She longs for having a house full of all kinds of luxuries, being admired and respected by everybody, but her reality defers quite a lot from what she desires, she lives in a small town at the French-British country side, and her husband is no more but a low rank government clerk at The Minister of Public Instruction.
The story of the Necklace starts when the couple received an invitation for a fancy dinner from The Minister of Public Instruction. Mathilde got a beautiful dress and she borrowed the Diamond necklace from an aristocratic friend to wear it at the dinner. To make the long story short, she lost the necklace and got into great debt to buy a similar diamond necklace to give back the original necklace to her friend. After ten years of hard work and suffering for paying the amount of money that the necklace had cost, she comes across her friend one day and decided to confess what she had done. With a very surprising turn of events, the friend to Mathilde that her original necklace was not made of real diamonds, and that it was not expensive at all, it only cost around 500 francs, not even 1 percent of what she had paid for the replacement.
I think that this entire situation was caused by a character's flaw, wanting to be something she was not was what caused the initial problem to Mathilde. Second, it could have been prevented by telling the truth to her friend when returning the necklace. Lastly, there is a bit of irony in the story, something which was a symbol of glamour and social status condemns you to a life of poverty and hard work.
