What causes the narrator's feelings for Pluto to change from love to hate?

The short answer? Alcohol. The narrator describes how his "general temperament and character -- through the instrumentality of the Fiend Intemperance -- had (I blush to confess it) experienced a radical alteration for the worse." Basically, he went from a loving husband and parent to many beloved pets to an angry drunk who would lash out at both his wife and his animals. He describes verbal as well as physical abuse on both.

Still, he kept from harming his favorite, Pluto, for a time, showing that Pluto's well-being was more important to the narrator than that of his own wife. Eventually, though, even Pluto is the victim of the narrator's violence, leading up to a terrible moment. 

The narrator begins suspecting that Pluto is avoiding him (only natural, considering his behavior). The thought of his beloved favorite avoiding his presence enrages the narrator and he grabs the cat forcefully. Pluto bites his hand, and the narrator responds by carving out Pluto's eye with a penknife and then hanging him, dead, from a tree. 

Clearly, the narrator's actions are totally outside the realm of reasonable reactions. Blowing Pluto's behavior out of proportion – or even inventing it entirely – causes him to murder his favorite creature. I think the blame lies squarely with the narrator and his terrible alcohol addiction.

When fluorine reacts with hydrogen, a covalent bond is formed between the two elements. How does this reaction occur and what is a covalent bond?...

Fluorine ( ) reacts with hydrogen ( ) to form the compound hydrogen fluoride ( ) as shown in the reaction below:

The bonds formed between H atoms and F atoms are covalent bonds. The electrons in a covalent bond are shared between the atoms. Covalent bonds can be composed of two shared electrons, four shared electrons, or six shared electrons. A covalent bond that is composed of two shared electrons is called a single bond. A covalent bond that is composed of four shared electrons is called a double bond. A covalent bond that is composed of six shared electrons is called a triple bond. The covalent bonds formed between H and F atoms are examples of single bonds.

What quotes show that Mrs. Putnam envies Rebecca Nurse in The Crucible?

Mrs. Putnam’s jealousy of Rebecca Nurse stems from the fact that Mrs. Putnam has had many children die in childbirth, while Rebecca Nurse has had no problem bearing children. Ultimately, this leads to the accusation of Rebecca Nurse for witchcraft, for which she is sentenced and hanged. This conflict is laid out from the beginning, when Mrs. Putnam admits that she had sent her daughter, Betty, to Tituba to find out who killed her seven children, who all died in childbirth. Rebecca Nurse, on the other hand, reveals that she has “eleven children” and is “twenty-six times a grandma.” Mrs. Putnam cannot accept that God would be so kind to one person and cruel to another, so she blames her own children’s deaths on witchcraft rather than believing the more rational explanation that they died from natural causes. At first, she places the blame on Goody Osburne, who was midwife to three of those children. Later, though, because of her jealousy, Mrs. Putnam accuses Rebecca Nurse of witchcraft. Frances Nurse reveals this in Act II, when he says that Rebecca Nurse was charged “for the marvelous and supernatural murder of Goody Putnam’s babies.” Though Rebecca Nurse is one of the most respected women in Salem, Mrs. Putnam needs someone to blame, and because Rebecca Nurse has been so fruitful in bearing children, she is an easy target.

What makes Atticus think the children didn't "stay put"?

When Miss Maudie's house catches fire, Atticus wakes the children and tells them to stand in the Radley yard. Jem and Scout follow Atticus' directive and stand in the Radley yard watching the neighbors attempt to save Maudie's furniture from the blaze. It was a very cold night, and Scout says that she felt like she was freezing. The next morning, while Atticus is making the children hot chocolate, he notices that there is a blanket wrapped around Scout's shoulders. He assumes that Scout and Jem left the yard to get a blanket because Scout did not take a blanket with her outside. When he asks Scout where she got the blanket from, she is at a loss for words. Atticus smirks and says, "Looks like all of Maycomb was out tonight, in one way or another." (Lee 95) When Atticus tells Scout that Boo Radley was the person who put the blanket over her shoulders, she nearly throws up.

What are the transformations Eliza Doolittle undergoes in Pygmalion? How do these transformations affect the ways that others think about her and...

The types of transformations undergone by Eliza Doolittle indicate, in a very astute manner, what constituted the concept of an upper-middle or upper class lady in her period. They embrace every aspect of her character and appearance; it is not until she has completely transformed every aspect of her outward being that she is fully accepted in "polite" society.

Voice and Accent: The initial transformation proposed by Professor Higgins is purely vocal. In the England of that period (and even to the present day), accent is a clear indicator of socio-economic status. Her voice, trained by expert linguist Higgins, is what first (falsely) convinces people that she is an aristocrat.

Personal Hygiene: As Eliza points out, the conditions of extreme poverty in which she lived made bathing impractical, and many of the upper class concepts of appropriate personal hygiene are quite alien to her. Dirt defined her as a member of the lower classes and repulsed members of the upper classes. Mrs. Pearce originally reacts to her with disdain because of her appearance. She is treated with greater respect by everyone when she appears after being cleaned up.

Manners and Conversation: Pickering especially and Mrs. Higgins teach Eliza not just the proper accent but appropriate topics of conversation and the degree of self-restraint that is considered essential to proper behavior. 

Once Eliza has managed to assimilate herself into the outward style and manners of upper class society, she becomes accepted in it. Interestingly, one of her more astute observations is that this is a two-way process and that it was, to a great degree, Pickering treating her like a lady that enabled her to become one.

What roles do Darzee and his wife play in the story? What types of characters are they? Use details from the story to explain.

Darzee and his wife are tailorbirds. In the story "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi," Rudyard Kipling uses these two characters as a foil and a sidekick for Rikki, the mongoose.

Darzee is a foil. A foil is a character who reflects the qualities of another character in the story through contrast. One of Rikki's outstanding qualities is bravery; Darzee, on the other hand, is timid. When Rikki asks who Nag is, he cowers down in his nest. Rikki is also very intelligent and forward-thinking; Darzee "could never hold more than one idea at a time in his head." These contrasts with Rikki make the mongoose seem all the more heroic.

Darzee's wife is a sidekick. A sidekick is a character who assists the hero. Granted, she only helps him at one point in the story and doesn't accompany him on most of his adventures. But in the scene where Rikki finds and destroys Nagaina's eggs, Darzee's wife is a fine assistant. Pretending to have a broken wing, she distracts Nagaina long enough to let Rikki locate and crack open the eggs and kill the baby snakes. She does this at great personal risk. She then calls out to Rikki to warn him that Nagaina has gone to the bungalow. Most heroes have a sidekick, and Darzee's wife fulfills that role for Rikki when he needs it.

Both Darzee as a foil and Darzee's wife as a sidekick help portray Rikki as a brave and cunning hero.

What is the assonance in "Two Friends" by Guy De Maupassant? What is the author's purpose?

Like many other Frenchmen, Maupassant felt very bitter about France's defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, which lasted from July of 1870 to May of 1871. The French were forced to accept costly and humiliating peace terms, including the loss of the province of Alsace and the Moselle department of Lorraine and an agreement to pay the Prussians an indemnity of five billion francs before the Prussian army would withdraw from the large area of France it occupied. Maupassant's story "Two Friends" reflects the hatred of Germans generally felt by Frenchmen as well as a detestation of the military mentality which had caused the war and their defeat. This attitude towards war is expressed by the two friends, Monsieur Morissot and Monsieur Sauvage. Maupassant himself hated war and soldiers. He writes in this story:

And Mont-Valerien thundered ceaselessly, demolishing the houses of the French with its cannon balls, grinding lives of men to powder, destroying many a dream, many a cherished hope, many a prospective happiness; ruthlessly causing endless woe and suffering in the hearts of wives, of daughters, of mothers, in other lands.

Maupassant's story is intended to show that the French are more peaceful and civilized than the hated Germans. It is also intended to show that Germans are cruel, ruthless, despicable men. It is thinly veiled propaganda. The two innocent friends are only trying to enjoy a day of peaceful fishing. The arrogant Prussian officer knows they are not spies but ends up having them shot by a twelve-man firing squad because the courageous little Frenchmen refuse to divulge the password they had been given to get through the French outposts. They sacrifice their lives because they know the diabolical Prussian would use the password to get his men through the French lines and kill French soldiers and civilians. 

Maupassant wrote a number of stories which were mainly intended to help prolong and intensify the French hatred of the Germans. The most famous of these is "Boule de Suif," about a patriotic French prostitute who is forced to submit to a hateful Prussian officer who holds up the coach in which she is riding with a group of French civilians until she relents. "Two Friends" can be best appreciated if read in conjunction with "Boule de Suif." Characteristically, Maupassant portrays the Prussian officer as a superficially polite but sadistic and ruthless man. 

French "revanchism" (spirit of revenge) influenced the Treaty of  Versailles after Germany's defeat in World War I. France reclaimed Alsace-Lorraine and also imposed ruinous reparation payments which were one of the causes of Hitler's rise to power and the catastrophe of World War II. Hitler defeated France in 1940 and imposed draconian peace terms on the French. He intended to re-annex Alsace-Lorraine if Germany was victorious in World War II.

In Of Mice and Men, how does Steinbeck show dreams and the American Dream in chapters 1-2?

In both chapters, George and Lennie dream of owning their own home, a key component of the American dream. This dream of living on their own small farm encompasses achieving autonomy, dignity, independence and sense of roots, all the opposite of their wandering, insecure life as migrant workers, at the mercy of the whims of their employers. In chapter 1, George paints for Lennie a picture of the place they dream of owning:

We’ll have a big vegetable patch and a rabbit hutch and chickens. And when it rains in the winter, we’ll just say the hell with goin’ to work, and we’ll build up a fire in the stove and set around it an’ listen to the rain comin’ down on the roof ...

In chapter 2, George again paints a vivid picture of the life he and Lennie will lead on their own land. Candy, a ranch hand in their bunkhouse, sad because his old dog has just been shot, overhears and asks to be part of it, offering to put in his savings. He explains that because he's been injured and lost a hand, he expects to be fired soon, but that he has the $250 the ranch gave him to compensate for losing the hand. For him, the farm Lennie and George dream of is a place where he could retire with dignity, and help with the hoeing and cooking and chickens. A home, some independence, a dignified retirement: these are the dreams and American Dream of these three men.

In Homer's The Odyssey, how does the encounter with the Lotus-eaters contrast with Odysseus's approach to the Ciconians?

When Odysseus and his men reach Ismarus, where the Ciconians live, they sack the city and kill the men they can find, rape the women, and steal all the treasure.  Once everything is divvied up, he advises his crew to get back on their ships and leave at once, but they do not listen to him.  While his crew is carousing that night, those men who escaped the city run for help, and those Ciconians attack Odysseus and his men, killing six from each ship.

Next, when Odysseus and his crew come to the land of the Lotus-Eaters, he takes a much more circumspect and careful approach.  He sends only three men ashore to find out what the Lotus-eaters are like so that he does not endanger his entire crew.  Here, such caution is warranted as he is able to wrestle those three men back to the ship after they've eaten the lotus flower.  If his entire crew had ingested this food, they would all have wanted to stay there forever, and Odysseus might not have been able to physically overpower them all.  He could, then, have lost his entire crew.

In a hydraulic system an initial force of 16 newtons is applied to a piston with a surface area of 2m^2 . Calculate the force on the opposite side,...

The operation of a hydraulic machine is based on the principle of Pascal. This principle states that the pressure exerted on a fluid is transmitted with the same magnitude in all directions.This principle is used in hydraulic presses.

If our system is formed by two pistons, then, when is exerted pressure on one of them, the other piston receives an equal pressure; so we can consider the following equality:

P1 = P2

P, is the pressure, defined as the force exerted per unit of surface, i.e.:

P = F/S

Rewriting the above equation we have:

F1/S1 = F2/S2

Then, for the force F2 we have:

F2 = (F1*S2)/S1 = (16*3.2)/2

F2 = 25.6 N

So the force on the opposite side is 25.6 N.

How does the author use symbolism and foreshadowing with the use of the scarlet ibis?

The scarlet ibis is a symbol for Doodle and the bird's death under the bleeding tree foreshadows the death of the young boy. Today, we might use the term "special" for Doodle because he suffers from a physical disability. Indeed, the author, James Hurst, wants us to consider Doodle a rare and unique individual. When he is born his Aunt comments that Doodle had almost a divine birth:

She said he would live because he was born in a caul, and cauls were made from Jesus' nightgown.

Like Doodle, the ibis is rare and fragile. It has been blown off its course by a hurricane and lands in the family's garden high up in the bleeding tree (a symbol for blood and death). It is a tropical bird and rarely gets as far away from home as North Carolina. Hurst describes the death of the bird, foreshadowing the later death of Doodle:

Its long, graceful neck jerked twice into an S, then straightened out, and the bird was still. A white veil came over the eyes and the long white beak unhinged. Its legs were crossed and its clawlike feet were delicately curved at rest. Even death did not mar its grace, for it lay on the earth like a broken vase of red flowers, and we stood around it, awed by its exotic beauty.

Doodle takes a keen interest in the bird, feeling an affinity to the fragile creature. He buries the bird and even sings a hymn for the dead bird.

After his brother pushes him too hard, Doodle dies from internal bleeding and is found under a nightshade bush (like the bleeding tree, a symbol of death). The description of Doodle in death mirrors the description of the ibis, and even the brother makes the comparison. Hurst writes:

"Doodle! Doodle!" I cried, shaking him, but there was no answer but the ropy rain. He lay very awkwardly, with his head thrown far back, making his vermilion neck appear unusually long and slim. His little legs, bent sharply at the knees, had never before seemed so fragile, so thin.

I began to weep, and the tear-blurred vision in red before me looked very familiar. "Doodle!" I screamed above the pounding storm and threw my body to the earth above his. For a long time, it seemed forever, I lay there crying, sheltering my fallen scarlet ibis from the heresy of rain.

The description of Doodle's long, slender neck and thin legs are reminiscent of the death of the ibis. And, like the ibis, Doodle's life ended tragically in the middle of tumultuous weather.

Why does Mrs. Crater think she has nothing to fear from Mr. Shiftlet at the beginning of "The Life You Save May Be Your Own" by Flannery O'Connor?

In the opening paragraph of Flannery O'Connor's short story "The Life You Save May Be Your Own," the third person omniscient narrator notes that Mrs. Crater did not fear the one-armed "tramp" who approaches her house one day at dusk. The fact that he has one arm makes Mrs. Crater believe he is basically harmless. She has probably also had several experiences with men wandering onto her property looking for work. She seems to know immediately how to deal with Mr. Shiftlet by offering him meals and a place to sleep if he will work for her. She knows better than to let on that she has any money to pay him.

Obviously, Mrs. Crater underestimates Mr. Shiftlet's intentions and his ability to manipulate her into giving up her car. In the end, it seems that Mr. Shiftlet fixes up the property and treats Lucynell with kindness for only one reason: he wanted Mrs. Crater's automobile to continue his drifting. At one point, Mr. Shiftlet even concedes that his nature is that of a drifter. He tells her that a "spirit" is "like an automobile: always on the move." In her desperation to attain a son-in-law, Mrs. Crater allows Mr. Shiftlet to marry Lucynell and take the girl and the automobile on a honeymoon. Mr. Shiftlet eventually dumps Lucynell and steals the car. A man Mrs. Crater believed to be harmless ultimately puts her daughter in danger and takes one of her most valuable possessions.  

"Is the current level of federal government spending good economic policy?”

There is no way to answer this question objectively.  Different people will have different answers. Moreover, there is no way to prove that the current level of government spending is good or bad economic policy. Here are two important factors to think about when trying to decide whether our current levels of spending are good.

First, we have to think about whether our current levels of spending are too high. The US government, of course, runs a rather high deficit every year.  As of right now, our deficit is about 2.5% of GDP.  These deficits have accumulated to create a rather large debt on which the US must pay interest.  Some people would argue that these deficits and this debt are bad for the US because they create a “crowding out” effect.  That is, the government borrows so much money that there is not enough for people and businesses to borrow, making it harder for our economy to grow. If you believe this, you might conclude that our government spending is too high.

The second issue is whether our money is being spent wisely. It is not necessarily bad to have deficit spending or debt.  However, it is important that the government spend on things that will be useful in the long run.  People typically say, for instance, that government spending on roads and bridges and such is good because it creates infrastructure that allows our economy to grow. This makes such spending a good investment. On the other hand, if the government is spending on things that will not help our economy grow in the future, we could argue that our government is spending on the wrong things. If the government is spending on the wrong things, we can conclude that current levels of government spending are not good economic policy.

Where does the overwhelming amount of seismic activity occur on Earth's surface?

Most of the seismic activity on Earth is found on (or near) the boundaries of tectonic plates. Earth's lithosphere is divided into a number of fragments, known as tectonic plates and these plates are in constant motion. The interaction of plates, with each other, gives rise to three types of boundaries: convergent (where plates are coming towards each other), divergent (where plates are moving away from each other) and transform (where plates are moving horizontally, past one another). Divergent boundaries (such as, mid-ocean ridges) are associated with small earthquakes, while convergent (such as, Nazca plate and South American plate) and transform (such as, Pacific plate and North American plate) boundaries are associated with large earthquakes. Some of the major earthquakes of recent human history, such as the one in Indian Ocean in December 2004 have taken place near plate boundaries. In fact, if one were to plot the location of major earthquakes in last few hundred years on Earth's map, most of them would coincide with plate boundaries.

Hope this helps. 

In The Merchant Of Venice, why couldn't Antonio give Bassanio any money?

Antonio could not give Bassanio any money since he did not have any ready cash available, as he explains to him:

Thou know'st that all my fortunes are at sea;
Neither have I money nor commodity
To raise a present sum:

What he means is that all his money has been invested in transporting commodities via ships to various destinations, since he is a sea merchant. Antonio also declares that he does not have any products which he can sell to raise the money Bassanio so desperately needs.

However, since Antonio wants to help his friend, he offers him an alternative:

therefore go forth;
Try what my credit can in Venice do:
That shall be rack'd, even to the uttermost,
To furnish thee to Belmont, to fair Portia.
Go, presently inquire, and so will I,
Where money is, and I no question make
To have it of my trust or for my sake.

Since he is a respected businessman, Antonio advises Bassanio to use his good name and creditworthiness to establish what kind of money he can raise in Venice. He tells Bassanio to try his utmost and do whatever he can so that he may have enough cash to go to Belmont where he could chance his luck at winning the beautiful Portia's hand. He tells him to leave soon and inquire where he can find money (a loan). He will also do his own enquiry to find out who would be prepared to extend him the finances Bassanio needs. He gives Bassanio the assurance that he will not question the issue about the sum being secured through the use of his name, or for his sake.   

It is this unselfish act by Antonio which forms the basis of his relationship with Bassanio. He is prepared to do everything that needs to be done to assist his friend. It is, therefore, unfortunate that his magnanimity is exactly what gets him into trouble with the moneylender, Shylock.  

Antonio is able to secure an interest-free loan of three thousand ducats from Shylock for Bassanio's use. The loan has to be repaid within three months with the condition that, if Antonio should forfeit, he has to allow Shylock to cut out a pound of his flesh. Antonio agrees to these terms and accordingly signs the bond, much against Bassanio's appeal that he should not. Antonio is confident that he will easily be able to settle the debt even before the due date since his ships would have returned after delivering their cargo and he will have more than enough money. 

Ironically, destiny intervenes and Antonio's plans go horribly awry. His ships are destroyed at sea and he cannot settle the debt on the due date. Shylock sees this as an opportunity to take revenge against Antonio whom he despises. Fortunately, Bassanio's newly wed bride, Portia, intervenes and ultimately, it is Shylock who is punished and Antonio is absolved of his debt. 

How did the slave trade interrupt African history economically, socially, and politically?

The answer to this question covers such a vast expanse of time, territory, and peoples, that in this particular forum I will only be able to give you the broad strokes—however, I will also gladly provide you with some references for further research.

In the first place, the slave trade caused the involuntary export of anywhere from 8 million to 20 million human beings, in a period of time stretching from the 1400s, which were the earliest days of the Atlantic slave trade, all the way up to the mid-nineteenth century—and this range of numbers represents a conservative estimate. To get an idea of the scope of this number of human lives, the population of the United States as a whole at the outset of the American Civil War was in the neighborhood of 31 million people. To say that the removal of tens of millions of men, women, and children would have a deleterious effect upon the social development is a gross understatement. In many sub-Saharan African nations, it is hypothesized that the extraction of such huge numbers of people had such a deleterious effect upon the economy of those nations, that they never recovered from it; it is speculated that because of this, the course of the development of those nations was irrevocably transformed.

Secondly, the social development of African as a continent of nations, the social development within those nations, and the perception of African and persons of African descent, was indelibly changed by the slave trade. The precise effects are a matter of some debate, as are the precise numbers of human beings taken into bondage in Africa. However, Walter Rodney, who was a prominent Guyanese historian and prolific commentator on the effects of the African slave trade, stated that the population of Africa stagnated for centuries following the inception of the slave trade, while the populations of Europe and the Americas continued to increase.

Politically, it has been speculated that the slave trade caused factionalism within ethnic groups and thus irrevocably changed the structure of power in many African nations. Historical consequences of war between factions, such as enslaving one’s enemies, now became profitable as these enemies could then be sold to European slavers. This may have further destabilized the political structure in many areas, because it may have provided an impetus for conflict. Another tragic consequence is the perception of Africa and African peoples by outside nations and peoples. Africa, a continent vast in territory and ancient in history, with rich cultures and civilizations, artistic and technological history, became a source of human slaves who were seen by outsiders and by slave traders and those societies dependent on slave labor, such as the American South, as being not even human. Laws codified this racism: the Three-Fifths Compromise of 1787 during the United States Constitutional Convention was designed to level the number of representatives, and thus, the amount of influence, that Southern states had. For the purposes of determining numbers of representatives, Southern delegates preferred that their huge numbers of slaves be counted as population, which would have provided the South with more representatives. However, slaves were property and not even thought to be human, and therefore had no voting rights. The compromise was that only three-fifths of the slaves could be counted for population figuring purposes and thus for the distribution of representatives of the Southern states. Events such as this led to a tragic result: once enshrined in law, the fight for equality for black Americans, and the ripple effects of institutionalized racism, with all of its attendant human brutality and misery, is suffered in the United States to this day.

As I said, the question of slavery and its effects is hundreds of years old, and affected millions of people of many very different cultures and nations in the continent of Africa. For more information, I encourage you to look further into the works of Walter Rodney, in particular, his book How Europe Underdeveloped Africa; and also into the delightful Ebony and Ivy: Race, Slavery, and the Troubled History of America’s Universities by Craig Steven Wilder, among many, many other books.

I also encourage you to explore the resources of the brilliant Charles H. Wright Museum of African American History in Detroit, Michigan, which can be found online at thewright.org.

I hope this helps.

List four benefits offered from "A Modest Proposal."

In Swift's "A Modest Proposal," the narrator offers the following four benefits for his plan of having the poor fatten and sell their babies as food:

1. It will bring in money to impoverished households. The narrator calculates the poor will make eight shillings in profit on each baby sold.

2. It will offer the tables of the rich a tender delicacy.

3. It will reduce wife abuse, as men will not want to damage pregnant women or women who are nursing and fattening their babies for sale.

4. As large numbers of these babies are eaten, it will reduce the number of Catholics in Ireland, a concern to the Protestant ruling class, which feared the "papists."

The benefits don't stop at four for this exuberant but clueless proposer: the plan will reduce abortions and infanticide, increase Ireland's overall wealth, and enterprising women will turn their babies' skins into gloves to sell to the rich, among other "positives" that the narrator suggests. 

How does context shape Steinbeck's message in Of Mice and Men?

The context (the setting of place, time, and circumstances) in which Of Mice and Men takes place is that of a self-contained, homogeneous environment of working-class men. A character either belongs or he does not, being marginalized from the rest of the group. Steinbeck’s message concerns what happens to those who do not “fit in”? In that world, they are alienated or even destroyed. The idea of accommodation is not applicable.

Candy, who has lost his hand in an accident, is further ostracized by this dog, who is old, toothless, and smelly. While Candy is not destroyed, his dog (who can be seen as a symbol of those who are weak) is shot in order to “put him out of his misery.” Neither one has a place with the others, because they cannot work in the same manner as they have been doing.

Curley’s wife by the nature of her gender is outside of the group, even though she tries to push in. When she does, she is considered a “tramp” with only sex as the reason for her motive or existence. She is not seen as being on any level of equality in the context of the men.

Lennie proves himself a strong worker, even more than the other ranch hands, but this is not enough for the rest of the men to accept him. Though intellect is not necessarily a quality admired by the ranch hands, his limitations place him to the side. In the end, he is killed by George, much in the same way that Candy’s dog was put out of its misery.

The context thus mirrors a society burdened by the Great Depression, in which, not only do the weak not survive, even some of the strong do not either. In a world that has gone out of control, the ranch hands reflect the desire to somehow have some way to determine who “deserves” to have the few resources left.

How did the Free Soil movement contribute to the Civil War?

The Free Soil movement helped to contribute to the Civil War because it helped to create tension between the North and South.  This tension, over the issue of the expansion of slavery, helped drive the two sections apart.

The Free Soil movement was based on the idea that the lands to the west of the existing states, and particularly lands taken from Mexico during the Mexican American War, should not have slavery.  The Free Soil adherents felt that a system in which free white people worked small farms was morally superior to one in which enslaved blacks worked on large plantations.  Therefore, they resisted the expansion of slavery into the new territories. 

This stand by the Free Soil movement angered the South. Southerners felt that slavery should be allowed to expand.  They feared that the influence of slave states would be destroyed if too many new free states joined the Union.  Therefore, they were upset by the growing power of the Free Soil movement. 

The Free Soil movement also ended up contributing to the creation of the Republican Party.  This party’s power also worried the South because the party generally favored the Free Soil ideology.  This was an indirect way in which the Free Soil movement made the South unhappy.

By making the South unhappy with its antislavery message, the Free Soil movement helped drive a wedge between the North and South.  The tension created helped bring about the Civil War.

Name two active volcanoes in the Atlantic ocean.

According to the link I have attached below, there are 18 active volcanoes located in the Atlantic Ocean. Not all have been named. Some of the 18 are entirely under water. Like volcanoes found in other areas of the world, they tend to be found where the tectonic plates of the Earth's crust are being pulled apart. 

Tristan de Cunha is an island, shield volcano located in the southern Atlantic about midway between the southern tip of Africa and the country of Argentina in South America. A shield volcano is one whose lava has flowed mostly in a low, flat manner, so that it is wide, and not very tall. Tristan de Cunha has several cones and vents. Its last eruption happened in 1961.

Another volcano in the Atlantic that has a name is Ascension Island. It is north of Tristan de Cunha, about halfway between the countries of Brazil (South America) and Angola (Africa). It has many cones and domes, and is the tip of a volcano that rises from the bottom of the ocean, making it a stratovolcano. This type of volcano has lava that is thicker and slower moving than the more liquid type that formed Tristan de Cunha. This is one reason why it rises so high--the lava tends to cool before it has a chance to flow further out and flatten, so it makes a higher cone. It is considered active, although no eruptions have occurred since its discovery on Ascension Day in 1501.

The link I have provided below lists all the active Atlantic volcanoes.

What are some good ideas for an argumentative essay on Hamlet?

For any argumentative essay, you need a thesis statement (topic). In the first paragraph, you want to start with a general introduction of a few sentences about your topic. Then, state your thesis. Then, explain why the thesis is significant, interesting, relevant to the play, or relevant to a particular interpretation of the play. 

Hamlet's "delay" is a popular topic and many essays and articles have been written about it. A first paragraph on this topic needs to start with the general introduction, followed by the thesis statement, and then the significance of that thesis statement. I will use a logical introduction with a ridiculous thesis (in bold) statement just to show the structure of this opening paragraph: 

Hamlet must kill Claudius to avenge his father. He delays this vengeance repeatedly and this procrastination has been the subject of debate for centuries. Why does he keep putting it off? I would argue that whenever Hamlet sees Claudius in person, something triggers in his mind and he sees Claudius as a cute and fuzzy bunny. Hamlet has been hypnotized to see this hallucination by Polonius. Seeing the bunny (Claudius), Hamlet is simply unable to murder it (him). This, of course, drastically reinterprets the play and totally changes the traditional perception of Polonius's role in the play. 

In subsequent paragraphs, you want to find evidence from the play to support this thesis. It would also help to use secondary sources (articles) that argue in favor of your thesis. Quote these articles if necessary in the proper paragraphs. After that, provide one or more paragraphs of arguments that disagree with your thesis. Show how these arguments are false.

Use a final paragraph to state your conclusion. Note: do not just restate your thesis at the end, word for word. Restate your thesis by briefly explaining how your evidence supports it. State something like, "It is plausible if not certain that Polonius hypnotized Hamlet to view Claudius as a cute, fuzzy bunny in Act II. As an ally of Claudius, this was Polonius's way of protecting the king and making a fool of Hamlet in the process. The evidence I've provided lends more credence to the so called "Bunny Theory." 

Describe the pathological (disease) processes involved in achondroplasia.

First of all, achondroplasia is due to a single base change and is passed down as an autosomal dominant trait. Therefore, a person needs to only inherit one allele for the condition to occur. Often this occurs as a new mutation that occurs spontaneously. The region in the genome where this gene is located has a high rate of mutation. Therefore, two parents with no history of this disease can produce an offspring with achondroplasia and in other cases, it can be genetically transmitted from one or both parents who have the condition.

People with this condition has long trunks and short arms and legs which are disproportionate. They are small in stature. 

Many of the infants born with this are stillborn or die very early on. Individuals with achondroplasia have high mortality and low fertility because many individuals will not replace themselves with offspring when they become adults. 

As for the disease phenotype, much of the early cartilage in the infant doesn't harden to form bone due to the mutation they inherited in the FGFR3 gene. Genes direct the production of proteins in the body. A necessary protein needed to produce bone is overactive in a person with this mutation. This in turn interferes with the development of bone and the proper maintenance of the skeleton.

Other conditions associated with this are-- water on the brain, stenosis of spinal cord which can be very painful, difficulty in breathing, delays in motor skills and a large head in relation to the body size. There can be curvature to the spine in some individuals.

For people with this disorder, as conditions related to their spine arise, they can be tended to however, there is really no treatment for this disorder.

How do Old Major and Napoleon's behaviors impact the animals? (compare and contrast)

This is a great question. 

In the beginning of the book, we read of Old Major.  He has a dream and calls the animals for a meeting, where he urges the animals for a rebellion against man.  He is a cogent speaker.  He says that man is the only animal that only consumes without producing.  He also says that the animals only work, and in the end they are slaughtered.  In short, they are slaves. Old Major seems sincere.  The reader does not know this for sure, because he dies in chapter two. 

When it comes to Napoleon, he lives long enough for the reader to see his character.  He is a tyrant and conducts the farm to please himself and the other pigs.  Therefore, he is not sincere about the revolution. In fact, the farm is far worse under his leadership, and at the end of the book, he turns into a man. This shows that he is a new Jones. 

In A Christmas Memory, the author repeats "under" in this sentence: "These moneys we keep hidden in an ancient bead purse under a loose board under...

This beautifully written story is a memoir based upon events of Truman Capote's own childhood, when he was raised by an elderly relative after the suicide of his mother. He refers to her as his cousin and his friend, and also says she is "still a child." Her energy and enthusiasm provide him with much pleasure, and their deep bond causes him pain when she is sad, ill or otherwise unwell. One reason for their closeness is their poverty; they must be very resourceful and this means the cousin must teach Buddy all kinds of ways to survive and do what they can to eat and stay warm.

The yearly tradition of making fruitcakes of loved ones uses up every bit of the cousin's money she manages to save throughout the year. The sentence "These moneys we keep hidden in an ancient bead purse under a loose board under the floor under a chamber pot under my friend's bed," describes the special and secret hiding place for the money used for the Fruitcake Fund. There is a ritualized, chanting feel to the repetition of the word "under" that makes one feel the physical action required to retrieve the money. Also, this repetition emphasizes the idea that the gathering on ingredients and all the steps required to do so are also a ritual of sorts, performed every year when the cousin decides that it is "fruitcake weather."

Why was geography a turning point in the Civil War?

Geography was very important during the Civil War. Because Washington, D.C. was surrounded by southern states, it was essential that President Lincoln keep Maryland in the Union after Virginia seceded. If Maryland also seceded, Washington, D.C. would have been cut off from the North. President Lincoln arrested Maryland lawmakers who might have supported secession. As a result, Maryland stayed in the Union.

The South was very dependent on bodies of water for trade and for the movement of people and products. The North imposed a blockade on the South that became more effective as the war progressed. The South found it harder to get needed supplies into the Confederacy. They also found it much more difficult to trade with other countries. The Union blockade was quite effective.

The Mississippi River was very important to the South. If the North got control of the Mississippi River, the South would be divided. The states west of the Mississippi River would be cut off from the states east of the Mississippi River. Trade and transportation would be greatly impacted if this occurred. When the Union won the Battle of Vicksburg, the Union had complete control of the Mississippi River. This battle is considered one of the turning point battles of the Civil War.

Geography played a key role in helping to determine the eventual winner of the Civil War.

What are some examples of death imagery in "The Scarlet Ibis"?

There are several examples of death imagery in James Hurst's short story "The Scarlet Ibis" about two brothers growing up in North Carolina in the first part of the 20th century. The very first paragraph is full of words which suggest death, including "dead," "rotting," "untenanted," "empty," and "graveyard." The narrator is telling this story from many years after the events and so he knows how the story will turn out. He knows that his brother Doodle will die at a very young age. 

Throughout the story there are references and images of death. From the beginning the family thought Doodle would die and the narrator says,

Daddy had Mr. Heath, the carpenter, build a little mahogany coffin for him. 

The narrator admits that he was sometimes cruel to Doodle because his brother was disabled and even shows Doodle the coffin in the barn:

One day I took him up to the barn loft and showed him his casket, telling him how we all had believed he would die. It was covered with a film of Paris green sprinkled to kill the rats, and screech owls had built a nest inside it.

Death is mentioned again when the boys' mother talks about World War I:

And during that summer, strange names were heard through the house: Chateau-Thierry, Amiens, Soissons, and in her blessing at the supper table, Mama once said, "And bless the Pearsons, whose boy Joe was lost at Belleau Wood."

The war is mentioned because, in many ways, the two brothers are at war with each other as the narrator pushes Doodle to do things he is not physically capable of doing.

Hurst uses more death imagery when the ibis arrives in the family's yard. The bird has been blown off course by tumultuous weather (another symbol for the boys' relationship) and landed in the "bleeding tree." Hurst describes the death of the bird:

Its long, graceful neck jerked twice into an S, then straightened out, and the bird was still. A white veil came over the eyes and the long white beak unhinged. Its legs were crossed and its clawlike feet were delicately curved at rest. Even death did not mar its grace, for it lay on the earth like a broken vase of red flowers, and we stood around it, awed by its exotic beauty.

When Doodle dies at the end of the story, Hurst uses imagery quite similar to the description he used when describing the death of the ibis:

He lay very awkwardly, with his head thrown far back, making his vermilion neck appear unusually long and slim. His little legs, bent sharply at the knees, had never before seemed so fragile, so thin. 

Just as the bird died under the "bleeding tree," Doodle dies under a "nightshade bush." The ibis, of course, is meant to be a symbol for Doodle.

In Death of a Salesman and Of Mice and Men, how do the characters' dreams lead to their ultimate demise?

In Death of a Salesman, Willy Loman (get it? "low man"?) exemplifies the American Dream of getting out of poverty by pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. A career in sales was hailed as the best way to do that, and so Willy takes to it with gusto. Since he believes that he can achieve success through manipulating and charming those around him, he cultivates those qualities in himself and his children, Biff and Happy. Unfortunately, in Willy's dedication to this narrative of success, he refuses to acknowledge it is flawed until it's too late – if indeed he ever does. Biff sums up the reason for Willy's lack of success and eventual downfall in Act 2: 

"I am not a leader of men, Willy, and neither are you. You were never anything but a hard-working drummer who landed in the ash can like the rest of them! I’m one-dollar an hour, Willy! I tried seven states and couldn’t raise it. A buck an hour! Do you gather my meaning? I’m not bringing home any prizes anymore and you’re going to stop waiting for me to bring them home!"

As Willy realizes that neither he nor his sons will ever succeed, he begins to think that the best course of action is to kill himself in a car accident so his family can benefit from the insurance money. Even this plan, however, is framed as his "next big break," with his older brother Ben urging him towards the "diamonds" that made Ben rich (code for insurance money). Even at the end, Willy is looking for the magic key to success. 

In Of Mice and Men, George and Lennie dream of owning a farm together someday, where Lennie can keep rabbits. The way we see them reference that dream in their day-to-day life as migrant farm workers, though, suggests that it's more a fantasy than a realistic possibility for the pair. The way Lennie begs George to go over the details of the dream again and again makes it seem more like a soothing story than anything they could actually do. 

However, I would disagree that George and Lennie's dream of a farm leads to their demise. Rather, I would say that their demise comes from the loss of the possibility of achieving their dream. They seem to know it's unlikely, but when Candy offers his life savings as part of a down payment, it starts to seem real. Therefore, when Lennie messes up again and accidentally kills Curly's wife, the realization that their dream will never come true hits them even harder. This loss is summed up in the following dialogue after Lennie kills Curly's wife:

"Lennie said, 'George.'

'Yeah?'

'I done another bad thing.'

'It don't make no difference,' George said, and he fell silent again."

George seems to accept the fact that the dream of a farm could never come true. Still, it was like a beacon of hope to keep him and Lennie going through the drudgery and hard work of each day. With the loss of their dream, they are faced with the full ramifications of the Great Depression – all of the despair and struggle that so many working men faced.

What were Victor Frankenstein's warnings to Robert Walton in the book Frankenstein?

Once Victor finds out that Walton is willing to sacrifice everything -- even his own life -- in his pursuit of knowledge and discovery, Victor desperately wants to prevent his new friend from making the same mistakes that he did. He says,

"You seek for knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently hope that the gratification of your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been." 

Serpents are very often linked to temptation -- an allusion to the serpent in Eden who tempted Eve to eat the apple, the event that led to Adam and Eve's being ejected from paradise -- and so this makes it sound as though Victor believes that knowledge and wisdom can tempt and ruin a person the way the serpent tempted and ruined Eve. He wants to prevent Walton from succumbing to temptation as he has. As Victor relates the story of how he created a monstrous human being, he says,

"Learn from me, if not by my precepts, at least by my example, how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge, and how much happier that man is who believes his native town to be the world, than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow."

Again, he cautions Walton about seeking worldly knowledge, knowledge that is, perhaps, withheld from us for good reason. He believes that Walton will be safer and happier if he does not pursue this kind of knowledge but rather agrees to be satisfied with his home and himself as he is. There is, as Victor knows, danger in attempting to do more than a human being is supposed to do. Further, he tells Walton that

"If the study to which you apply yourself has a tendency to weaken your affections, and to destroy your taste for those simple pleasures in which no alloy can possibly mix, then that study is certainly unlawful, that is to say, not befitting the human mind."

Therefore, because Walton has suggested that he is willing to give up every other thing that brings him joy in life in order to satisfy his one dream of discovery, Victor implores him to understand that this means that his dream is not an appropriate one; it is too all-consuming to be healthy for a human mind. If Walton is willing to sacrifice everything else to it, then it is too dangerous to pursue.

In the novel, The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, who is Shmuel?

In the novel, The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Shmuel is a boy the same age as Bruno.  In fact, they both have the same birthday, April 15, 1934.   

Shmuel is a Jewish boy from Poland and is a prisoner of war in Auswitz.  In many ways, he is the antithesis of Bruno.  They represent opposite sides of the war: the German “Nazi” side, and the Jewish side.  Bruno is a German, living in a beautiful, comfortable home, with parents who love him. Shmuel is living in a prison camp, wears striped “pajamas,” and has a Star of David armband.  He is separated from his mother, and he and his father were imprisoned together.   

The boys form a friendship and Bruno learns many hard lessons from Shmuel.  He learns that Shmuel is hungry, that he has no freedom, and that he gets beaten by the soldiers.  On one occasion, Shmuel is brought into the house to clean glasses because his hands were small.  Bruno notices the difference in their hands. 

“Although Bruno was small for his age, and certainly not fat, his hand appeared healthy and full of life.  The veins weren’t visible through the skin, the fingers weren’t little more than dying twigs.  Shmuel’s hand, however, told a very different story.” (pg 167-168)

When Bruno sees Shmuel in the kitchen, he is thrilled.  However, Lieutenant Kotler finds them conversing and notices that Shmuel has eaten something, something that was given to him by Bruno. When Shmuel says that he and Bruno are friends, Bruno, in fear of Lieutenant Kotler, denies it. 

"He’d never seen anyone look so terrified as Shmuel did at that moment and he wanted to say the right thing to make things better, but then he realized that he couldn’t; because he was feeling just as terrified himself.” (pg 172)

Shmuel is severely beat, and Bruno feels very ashamed.

“He had never felt so ashamed in his life; he had never imagined that he could behave so cruelly.  He wondered how a boy who thought he was a good person really could act in such a cowardly way towards a friend.” (pg 174)

Two boys the same age, nine, represent two sides of the war. They were born the same day and died the same day.

Why has the demand for providers specializing in geriatric care increased?

There are two main reasons why the demand for providers specializing in geriatric medicine has increased. 

The first reason is that the number of patients reaching geriatric age is increasing. There are simply more older people now than there were in the past, both in number and in percent of the population. This is due to an increase in life expectancy coupled with the fact that the Baby Boomer generation is now reaching their golden years. Quite simply, more doctors are needed to treat more people. 

The second reason is that there has been an increase in awareness of the fact that geriatric populations have different concerns than younger adults. Older adults are more likely to experience one or more chronic conditions, the management of which can be complicated by age. Increasingly, older adults are actively seeking out specialists who can address their particular needs. More geriatricians are needed because seeing a specialist has become more mainstream.

In "Snake," how does DH Lawrence demonstrate respect for other creatures?

The narrator in D.H. Lawrence's poem "Snake" demonstrates respect for other creatures by humanizing the snake who drinks out of the narrator's water trough. Further, the tension between what the narrator thinks he should do (admire and respect the snake) present a sharp contrast in reference to what he has been conditioned to do.

In the seventh section of the poem, the narrator depicts the snake as a fellow comrade, even a "guest" who is then described to be "peaceful, pacified, and thankless," in spite of the fact that it is customary to view (gold snakes, in particular) as "venomous." Indeed, we see the snake as an equal rather than an adversary who must be destroyed. In fact, the narrator feels "honoured" to have such a guest, yet this sense of honor does not prevent him from attempting to destroy the snake. Even after the narrator executes a clumsy attempt at harming the snake, the narrator then states that he "despised himself and his accursed human education" for doing so. This line specifically addresses the ongoing issue of tradition and social convention versus human intuition and emotion. And, even though the narrator does succumb to his "accursed" human ways, the fact that these very views towards other creatures are questioned illustrates the narrator's overarching respect for other creatures. 

Write an article as a journalist to explain to your readers how the War of 1812 brought political and economic changes to the United states.

Any article on the results of the War of 1812 would need to stress the importance of its effect on American morale and confidence.  With the victories of the war, Americans were riding high.  They had defended their lands from one of the strongest empires in the world for a second time in a quarter of a century. This brought an era of unprecedented cooperation in American government that saw a one-party system for a time.  This does not necessarily sound like a good thing, having one party, but in this instance, there was a period of cooperation in the federal government.  The confidence of the war, coupled with the fact that the British would stop instigating the Native American tribes would see the United States expand West at a fevered pace.  This would ultimately hurt the tribes in a major way, but from the perspective of Americans at the time, it was an exciting time.  The war also had a significant effect on the military situation in the United States.  The United States abandoned the practice of state militias for defense and began the process of creating a national standing army.  

What is the meaning behind Pip placing Joe's child (also Pip) on his parents' tombstone?

In the beginning of the novel, Pip is in the graveyard, visiting his dead parents and siblings. When Magwitch meets him, he puts Pip on top of the gravestone. His life following this “placement” leads eventually to his “great expectations.” Though there was great turmoil and suffering along the way, Pip reaches a place where his destiny is one of security and contentedness, though it is not the type that he had expected it to be. By placing his namesake on the gravestone, Pip is symbolically starting young Pip Gargery on his own path to great expectations. The story has come full-circle, and Pip the elder has placed himself in that role of a mentor, to lead the child along his road of destiny, something which Pip himself had not had.

"The White Silence" summary ?

Like many of Jack London's stories "The White Silence" is set in a very unforgiving winter landscape in the Yukon Territory of Canada. Three people--Mason, his pregnant native wife Ruth, and the Malemute Kid--are traveling across the Northland Trail. They and their sled dogs are attempting to reach civilization with their load of furs. They are short of food, both for themselves and the dogs. One of the dogs, Carmen, is injured; Mason says the dog won't last for three days. When Mason stops his sled for a moment, a pine tree falls on him and crushes his right side. The three know he will die, but Ruth and the Kid try their best to save him. They build a fire, and the Kid goes to hunt but finds nothing. When he returns to Mason and Ruth he finds the starving dogs have attacked the food supply leaving only flour for the remaining two hundred miles of the difficult trip. Mason is delirious, speaking of his youth in Tennessee, but clings to life. After making Ruth start the rest of the journey on one of the sleds, the Kid waits for Mason to die, but finally gives up and cuts the cord he has set that keeps the pine boughs around Mason earthbound."Mason swung into his aerial sepulcher"--the pine boughs have launched him into the air and he will not survive the impact with the ground. The Kid resumes the rest of the journey.

Why does Mr. Maxwell hunt in Andrew Clements' A Walk in the Woods?

In chapter 17 of Andrew Clements' A Week In the Woods, while Mr. Maxwell is starting off on the trail in pursuit of the missing Mark, we learn that Mr. Maxwell loves to hunt because he sees it as a chance to commune with nature.

Mr. Maxwell notes that his friends wonder how he "could be so concerned about [nature] conservation and still be a hunter" (p. 125). Mr. Maxwell explains that he sees himself as able to fully understand nature; he understands it in terms of science and in terms of its "day-to-day rhythms" (p. 125). He feels he is participating in those daily rhythms when he "hikes for two miles in the predawn silence" and waits, watching for a dear, "sometimes for five or six hours" (p. 125). As he watches, he feels he becomes part of the woods because he can "notice every motion, every change in wind direction, [and] every small sound" (p. 125).

In addition to seeing hunting as a means of becoming one with nature, he actually never kills what he hunts. Instead, he practices his skill of hunting with a bow and arrow by taking aim, but as he pulls back the bowstring, he makes a slight noise that scares off the deer. He philosophizes his hunting tactics in the following:

He didn't take the food nature offered him because he didn't truly need it. He only needed to know that the food was still there. (p. 126)

Hence, as a nature conservationist, he partakes in hunting experiences because hunting allows him to be with nature and to see that nature still exists as it should.

If you have a litter of kittens that includes 2 long haired, 2 tailless and 4 short haired, how can this occur?

The presence of certain traits in offspring depends on the genotype of the parents and whether the trait is dominant or recessive. A dominant trait is one which is expressed when only one copy of the gene is present. Thus, if B represents a dominant gene, the corresponding trait will be expressed in individuals which have two copies (BB) and those who have only one copy (Bb). When the individual has zero copies of the dominant gene (bb), the recessive trait will be observed.

In cats, both short hair (A) and tailless are dominant traits. Long hair and tailed are the corresponding recessive traits, respectively. However, the tailless gene is lethal when in the homozygous form. Homozygous means both copies are present (MM).

In this example, at least one of the parents must have been tailless (Mm), because two tailed (mm) parents cannot produce tailless offspring. See the possible three cases below.

1. Two tailed parents: mm x mm 

Possible offspring: mm mm mm mm (100% tailed) 

2. One tailed parent x one tailless: mm x Mm

Possible offspring: mM mm mM mm (50% tailed, 50% tailless)

3. Two tailless parents: Mm x Mm

Possible offspring: MM Mm mM mm (25% lethal, 50% tailless, 25% tailed)

With respect to coat length, these are the possible cases:

1. Both parents long-haired (aa x aa)

Possible offspring: aa aa aa aa (100% long haired)

2. Both parents short haired homozygous (AA x AA)

Possible offspring: AA AA AA AA (100% short haired)

3. Both parents short haired heterozygous (Aa x Aa)

Possible offspring: AA Aa Aa aa (75% short haired, 25% long haired)

4. One long haired, one short haired heterozygous (aa x Aa)

Possible offspring: aA aa aA aa (50% short haired, 50% long haired)

5. One long haired, one short haired homozygous (aa x AA)

Possible offspring: aA aA aA aA (100% short haired)

In the book Night by Elie Wiesel, what happens to Moishe the Beadle and the other foreign Jews in Sighet? How do the others in the community react...

Early in Night, Moishe the Beadle and other foreign-born Jews are deported out of Sighet on the same cattle cars that will later be used to transport Elie.  At the time, the Jews of Sighet assume that the deportees have simply been returned to their home countries, and continue on with their own lives.

Moishe the Beadle is able to escape from his transport and make his way back to Sighet. There, he is desperate to communicate the horrors he has seen -- among them, the use of Jewish babies for machine gun "target practice."  The Jews of Sighet cannot fathom such horrors and they assume that Moishe has gone mad.  Like Madame Schachter later in the book, the Jews of Sighet largely ignore Moishe the Beadle's warnings. 

What are some theories and studies from sociolinguistic pioneers that are mentioned in Chapter 13 of the sixth edition of An Introduction to...

There is, of course, nothing that replaces reading a chapter for yourself! However, if you're looking for a summary of the chapter, I have provided my notes below:

- 1988: Pilkington illustrates that men gossip just as much as women do, but do so differently. Men's gossip "involves insults, challenges, and various kinds of negative behavior" while women's involves the "use of nurturing, polite, feedback-laden, cooperative talk." Regardless, both are acts of solidarity with members of the same gender.

- 1994: Haas notes that the Koasati language (Amerindian, originated in southwestern Louisiana) uses male and female pronunciations. Many other languages include these phonological differences, including the Gros Ventre language of the Northeast United States; however, only the Koasati includes "no such changeover in reporting or quoting."

1973: Lakoff demonstrates that certain words are more likely to be used by women than men in the English language and notes the "entrenched patterns of usage" of gender-based distinctions (i.e. actors versus actress). 

1999: Romaine indicates that although there have been efforts to neutralize this language, gender-inclusive language doesn't necessarily reflect an understanding of the sexist basis behind this language. It is certainly possible to avoid gender distinctions in speech.

1998: Bradely determines that Yanyuwa, and Australian aboriginal language, includes dialects that are gender-based. While all children are raised with the female dialect, boys must eventually transition into the male dialect.

1975: Brend suggests that women more frequently use intonations of surprise  and politeness than men. This includes phrasing answers with the intonation of a question.

2003: Mills argues that politeness "is not a property of utterances" and is instead "a set of practices or strategies which communities of practice develop, affirm, and contest"; the consequence of this is that not all communities agree on what politeness looks like, and thus, it can not be claimed that women are more likely to be polite in their language.

1993: James and Clark disrupt the notion that men are more likely to use interruptions to control speech, finding that "a small amount of evidence exists that females may use interruptions of the cooperative and rapport-building type to a greater extent."

1996: Coates examines the conversations of women, determining that women exchange stories, invite others to talk through questioning, and frequently repeat the words of others.

1996: Freed and Greenwood determine that men and women use "you know" at the same frequency and for the same reasons and that the portrayal of women as using this phrase more often is stereotypical.

1982: Maltz and Borker assert that North American men and women "come from different sociolinguistic sub-cultures" that result in miscommunication.

1990, 1993, 1994, 1998: Tanen claims that the socialization process involves gender-related activities, attitudes, and language. In other words, we learn to "act like boys and girls."

How does Benét use setting to create a mood of suspense and hold our interest in "By the Waters of Babylon"?

Benet's setting in "By the Water's of Babylon" is able to create a suspenseful mood, because the setting is vaguely familiar while at the same time being unsettling.  Normally, familiarity brings calm feelings, but that isn't the case with this story.  It's unclear at the beginning if this story is in the past or in the future, and not being able to pin it down is unsettling.  Then the narrator drops hints about "The Great Burning" and metal that can kill.  That sounds immediately ominous and suspenseful.  Then, as the story progresses, the reader begins figuring out that John's society is a future society that has been completely wiped out.  The people have reverted to practically cavemen status, and everything about the nature and the Place of the Gods seems ready to kill John.  It's an interesting thing that Benet was able to do with the setting.  He was able to give more and more detail to his reader while at the same time ramping up the suspense by causing the reader to always have more questions than answers.  

What are similarities between flora and fauna for kids?

Flora means plants and fauna means animals. These terms usually refer to a location, such as the flora and fauna of a national forest. The total of all organisms, including bacteria and fungi, is referred to as biota.

All living things have these characteristics in common:

• They are made of cells


• The use acquire and use energy


• They grow and develop


• They reproduce


• They respond to their environment


• They have the ability to evolve (adapt to their environment)

Some of these chararateristics have different mechanisms in plants than in animals. For example, while both obtain food, plants make their own food using the energy from sunlight and animals eat plants and other animals. Animals are male and female and reproduce sexually. Plants also have male and female parts and reproduce sexually. Some plants also reproduce vegetatively, for example by sending out shoots or runners that become new plants. Spider plants and strawberry plants do this.

Animals have a nervous system through which they respond to their environment. Even animals without an actual brain have nerves of some type. Plants don't have a nervous system, but they can still detect and respond to environmental conditions such as sunlight and gravity. They turn toward the sun. Some plant track the sun throughout the say. Others, such as sunflowers, always face a particular direction. Plants grow upward, away from the force of the earth's gravity, and their roots grow downward toward gravity.

What behavior comes from direct experience or from observing the behavior of other animals?

The type of behavior that comes from observing another animal, or through an animal's direct experience, is known as a learned behavior. Learned behaviors differ from behaviors animals instinctively know, such as the behavior of breathing, which are called innate behaviors. Innate behaviors are programmed into an animals genetics, while learned behaviors can only be developed through processes such as experience, trial and error, and observation. Learned behaviors have 5 distinct characteristics that separate them from innate behaviors:

1. The behavior must be unable to be inherited, meaning it can only be obtained through one of the three previously mentioned methods, trial and error, experience, or observation


2. The behavior must be able to be learned only in the presence of others, meaning if an animal were raised in complete isolation from other animals it would not be able to learn the behavior on its own


3. The behavior must be adjustable, meaning that the animal has the ability to change the order, or progression, of the behavior over time as greater learning occurs


4. The behavior must be able to be altered to fit a specific environments or sets of conditions meaning the animal can adapt the behavior to suit its needs


5. The behavior must also be improvable, meaning that the animal is capable of getting better with more practice, observation, and/or trial and error. 

Based on these 5 factors, one can determine if the behavior is a learned behavior developed through observation and/or experience, or is an innate behavior and occurs regardless of environment. Hope this helps!

Give 4 reasons why alliances are the greatest cause of large scale or global wars. (Some examples of alliances are NATO, Triple alliance, SEATO &...

This is a very loaded question. It's honestly not clear that alliances are the greatest cause of large-scale wars. (What about ideology? Economics? Geopolitics?) But there are a few reasons why they may contribute to them.

(1) Alliances can transform a small skirmish into a global war.

The most basic kind of alliance is a defensive pact; it basically just says that if someone attacks you, I'll help defend you, and if someone attacks me, you'll help defend me. When these types of alliances are in place between many countries, a small conflict that could have remained between two minor countries can quickly spread to others, as the first country invokes an alliance with the second, the second invokes an alliance with the third, and so on.

This seems to be what happened in WW1, where a relatively minor triggering event (the assassination of a single relatively unimportant official) eventually escalated into the largest war in history up to that point.

(2) Alliances create natural antagonists.

When much of the world unites into a small number of competing alliances, those alliances begin to seem like natural enemies where previously the situation seemed much more complex.

If you have a situation like we had in the Cold War where most of the world was being absorbed into either NATO or the Eastern Bloc, rather than having the complexities of Germany interacting with France interacting with the US interacting with the UK interacting with Russia interacting with the Ukraine interacting with China, we instead had (or seemed to have) two huge, monolithic entities: NATO on the one hand, and the Eastern Bloc on the other. The complex interactions of many states were effectively reduced to one single global conflict.

On the other hand, the Cold War never did actually erupt into full-scale war.

(3) Alliances can disrupt the balance of power.

If there are many different countries, each with roughly the same amount of military power, there is a balance of power in which no individual country can dominate the others; any that try to do so will quickly be outnumbered and overwhelmed.

But if alliances form between some of the countries, a single alliance can become powerful enough to break this balance of power, gaining enough advantage that they can seriously hope to take several other countries at once. If this happens, the new dominant alliance may decide to start a war to conquer other nations and absorb them into the alliance.

(4) A global conflict by definition requires global powers.

This may be the most fundamental. Before the alliance system that linked dozens of countries in the 19th century, we did not have a time without war. We had a time with many wars, all going on simultaneously, but they were disorganized, only loosely connected to one another. Individual leaders had individual grievances and fought individual wars; the total amount of death going on at any given time was basically the same, but because it was happening in different places for different reasons among different people we didn't think to call it a "world war". We only started calling things "world wars" when there were alliances large enough to link deaths around the world into a single unified conflict.

This is also part of why the question is so loaded; alliances may not actually be the source of these wars at all, but simply the reason we call them "global" instead of thinking of them as a bunch of little wars going on at once.

In Of Mice And Men, why does George lie about the gun?

At the end of Chapter Five of Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men the ranch hands, including a very angry Curley, prepare to go after Lennie when Curley's wife is found dead in the barn. When Carlson goes to retrieve his Luger pistol he discovers it missing and blames Lennie, claiming, "The bastard's stole my Luger" which prompts Curley to order the men to shoot for Lennie's "guts." George immediately lies, suggesting that Carlson has lost his gun. In reality, George has taken the gun with the idea of killing Lennie himself. George most certainly remembers the words of Candy who insists that he should of shot his dog himself. George's decision is further strengthened when Slim tells him that it wouldn't be good for Curley to get to Lennie first or for Lennie to be locked up and strapped down. In the end, George uses the Luger to shoot Lennie in the back of the head.  

When would the degree of decentralization be greater?

Generally, we measure decentralization by measuring its opposite, centralization. There are actually formal measures of centralization in graph theory, which are based on what proportion of links are in by what proportion of nodes. A highly centralized network will have many of its links accounted for by a small number of nodes.

Since you asked this as a "social sciences" question, I assume you're most interested in examples from political and economic systems.

A more centralized government is one in which more decisions are made by the top decision-makers, rather than delegated to intermediate levels of leadership. For example, federal law is more centralized than state law, which is more centralized than city ordinances. Depending on what proportion of important laws are made at each level, a government could overall become more centralized or decentralized. There is reason to think, in fact, that the US government has become more centralized over time, with the federal government taking on more and more roles previously reserved for state governments. (Is this good or bad? Hard to say. But it's definitely more centralized.)

A government could also be considered more decentralized if decisions are made by a large legislative body instead of a single executive official. In this sense the US government has definitely gotten more centralized, as the role of the President has greatly expanded over time.

Businesses, or even whole industries, can also be consider more or less centralized. An industry with a handful of major corporations that control it (such as aircraft manufacturing) is more centralized than an industry with a large number of competing producers (such as tomato farming). Even within a company, decision-making could be more decentralized if the management structure is set up to delegate more authority to middle managers or employees instead of top executives.

It sounds like you might also be interested in circumstances that might lead to greater or lesser decentralization. This is a much harder question; there isn't a lot of consensus withing political science on why some governments become more centralized than others. It may be related to complex cultural and historical factors. We do have some reason to think that countries with a lot of easily-extracted natural resources (such as gold or oil) tend to have more centralized governments, because the government often forms around that particular extractive industry. But even then there are clear exceptions, such as Norway, which produces a lot of oil but has a very decentralized government.

In economics at least, we do have the concept of a natural monopoly, or more generally a natural oligopoly. In either case, this is an industry where, given the amount of demand, and operating at optimal efficiency, there is a fixed number of companies that would sell in that market. Either more or fewer companies entering the market would end up producing less efficiently. A natural monopoly is the special case when the optimal number of companies is exactly 1. You could also have a natural duopoly (2), a natural triopoly (3), and so on.

A good example of a natural monopoly is municipal water; the setup cost for water lines is very large, but the marginal cost of providing water is very small, so it makes the most sense in terms of efficiency for one company to set up to provide water and then provide it to everyone in the city.

In the presence of a natural oligopoly, centralization becomes greater. The smaller the oligopoly, the stronger this centralization becomes.

What is the economic system in the United States?

The United States economy has come a long way from a free market capitalistic economy to a mixed economy as seen today. These changes were necessitated by several historical events such as the Great Depression. Prior the Great Depression, the American economy was a free market capitalist economy. However, after the economic downturn, the general opinion suggested that capitalism was untenable.

John Maynard Keynes suggested managed capitalism as the solution to the economic woes facing the country. Basically, he supported increased government involvement and regulation of some aspects of the economy. However, the economy still features some core capitalist aspects including freedom of individual choice, protection of private property and healthy competition. Over time, the government has increased its involvement in the national economy and provides products and services that are deemed too sensitive to be left to the free market.