I encountered this question before. The underlined idiom was "SHE PUT HER NOSE TO THE FIRE". This question also had choices. These were:
<span>She was cold as she wrote her speech, so she sat by the fire.
She worked hard to finish her speech for the assembly.
She was proud of the speech once she finished it.
She finished the speech in a very short amount of time.
The underlined idiom tells the reader that SHE FINISHED THE SPEECH IN A VERY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME.
When you put your nose to the fire, you don't last long because of the heat. Thus, you only spend a short amount of time putting your nose to the fire.</span>
-The signature should come after the closing.-
Is the correct answer, hope this helps, Merry Christmas & Happy Holidays!
The answer is A) The author believes the experience dehumanizes people both on and off the train.
In <em>Night</em>, Elie Wiesel shares his experience in the Nazi concentration camps. Through the book, he writes how the values of humanity are lost and some of the concepts he grow up with are useless now.
In this excerpt we can see how the situation happening inside the wagon is inhuman, because the people on the train are considered to be less than humans, more like animals, because their need for food makes them fight for something as minimal as a crust of bread.
One of the values that makes us human is the solidarity and the ability to share feelings with other humans. In this excerpt, we can also see that the passersby and the workers enjoy watching people fight for bread crumbs, therefore they have lost this value, becoming less human for it.
The options B and C are incorrect, because the passersby and the workmen are not sharing food rations with the hungry prisoners (only bread crumbs, that can't be considered rations), nor being kind with them. The option D can be also considered correct but is not as descriptive as the option A.
Answer: The personification suggests that past happiness can last a long time.
Explanation: In this line, the personification consists of attaching the verb "sing" to the abstract concept of "joy," and its meaning is clear when we read that the voice of joy was sent "across an hundred years," i.e., happiness, according to the author, can last a century and is not limited to a single moment in the spring.
1- <span>The ancient Chinese board game “Go” is invented long before there was any writing to record its rules. A game from the impossibly distant past has now brought us closer to a moment that once seemed part of an impossibly distant future: a time when machines are cleverer than we are.
<u>Because it's an action that started and finished in the past, this should read </u><u>was</u><u> (Simple Past)</u>
2- </span><span>For years, Go was considered the last redoubt against the march of computers. Machines might win at chess, draughts, Othello, three-dimensional noughts and crosses, Monopoly, bridge, and poker. Go, though, is different.
<u>This continues the same line of mistake as the first paragraph. Because it's referencing something that already happened ("Go was considered...), this should read </u><u>was</u><u> (Simple Past).</u>
The game required intuition, strategising <u>and</u> character reading, along with vast numbers of moves and permutations. According to legend, it was invented by a Chinese emperor to teach his subjects balance and patience: qualities unique to human intelligence.
<u>The conjunction and is used before the last element in a list. In this case, this word should be substituted by a comma because <em>character reading</em> is not the last element on that list.</u>
3- </span><span>This week, though, a computer called Alpha Go <u>defeats</u> the world’s best player of Go. It did so by “ learning” the game, crunching through 30 million positions from recorded matches, reacting and anticipating. It <u>evolves</u> as a player and taught itself.
That single game of Go marks a milestone on the road to the “technological singularity”, the moment when artificial intelligence becomes capable of self-improvement and learns faster than humans can control or understand.</span><span>
<u>These should read defeated ... evolved. This continues the same line of thought on subject-verb agreement. If it's talking about a past event, and the rest of the paragraph sustains that idea, then these verbs should be in Simple Past.</u></span><span>
</span>