If the earth were one inch in diameter, how big would the moon be in inches

The diameter of Earth is 12742 kilometers. If the model that represents the Earth has diameter of 1 inch, then the scale is:

1 inch = 12742 kilometers

Expressing this as a ratio, it becomes 1:12742.

The diameter of the moon is 3474 kilometers. To determine the diameter of the model of the moon in inches, assign a variable that represent it.  Let it be x.

x inches  = 3474 kilometers

Expressing it as a ratio, it becomes x:3747.

To solve for the value of x, set the two ratios equal to each other. Take note that when used in equations, the ratio should be in fraction form.

`x/3747=1/12742`

Isolating the x, the equation becomes

`x=1/12742*3747`

`x=0.2726`  

Therefore, the diameter of the model of the moon is 0.2726 inch.

Who is Piggy in The Lord of the Flies?

Piggy is one of the boys that crashes onto the island, and he quickly distinguishes himself as both a physically weak and intellectually strong boy. Readers never learn his real name; he identifies himself as Piggy from the onset and secures that as a name for himself by saying that he hopes the boys on the island won't call him what other kids used to call him at school--of course, that is exactly what they call him. In spite of his seemingly uncanny ability to attract bullying, Piggy is the most intelligent, rational boy on the island.

The book opens with an interaction between Piggy and Ralph, in which readers discover that Piggy is overweight, has asthma, and wears glasses. 

He was shorter than the fair boy and very fat. He came forward, searching out safe lodgments for his feet, and then looked up through thick spectacles.

His physical appearance, his nickname, and his constant references to his "Auntie" cause the other boys to pick on him from the beginning of the novel all the way until his death in the end, which comes at the hands of Roger. 

In spite of his physical appearance and the tendency of the boys to pick on Piggy, he demonstrates repeatedly that he has a firm grasp on both rationality and morality, likely as a result of his superior intelligence. 

Piggy knows that, in order to survive, the boys must create some sort of order; he suggests using the conch shell he and Ralph find in the water to call all of the boys together.  “We can use this to call the others. Have a meeting. They’ll come when they hear us—.” He also suggests taking down everyone's names so they have an accounting of all of the boys. 

As the novel progresses, it becomes clear that Piggy believes that, whether they are rescued or not, rules are paramount. He insists on holding the conch to speak, and he grows frustrated when others don't respect his right to speak. He also looks after the younger boys when they begin to fear "the beastie," and brings their fears to the attention of Ralph. Ralph, throughout the novel, seeks Piggy's input as an unofficial "second in command."

Piggy is shown to be such a model of rules and order throughout the novel that his death at the hands of Roger can be seen as a metaphorical death of rules and order itself. 

As a character that starts out the novel as a seemingly weak asthmatic who can't swim, Piggy soon distinguishes himself as someone who, as an adult, would likely have grown out of the childish judgments cast upon him and become a successful, moral, upstanding citizen due to his intelligence and loyalty. 

In Congressional debates in 1790 about the possible abolition of slavery, Georgia representative James Jackson attacked the abolitionist Quakers as...

James Jackson's words are not dissimilar to the popular Southern sentiment of the time: that slavery was a burden that the South had inherited from British colonial forebears; and that their only real choice was to maintain the system of bondage or free the slaves and be threatened with the possibility of being overtaken by its black population.

In states such as Virginia and South Carolina -- and later, Mississippi -- blacks outnumbered whites. There was palpable fear of black dominance. The reversals of all of the advances made during Reconstruction, including the elections of the first black Congressional representatives and senators, were a response to this fear of black power. 

Southern whites could not imagine a system in which blacks, whites, and however many Native Americans remained, simply co-existed. Moreover, to justify their refusal of co-existence, they deemed black people a separate species.

Nineteenth-century pseudosciences, such as phrenology, supposedly determined personality and intelligence by measuring skulls. Non-whites were somehow always deemed deficient in certain areas according to skull measurements. Phrenology was an outgrowth of craniometry -- interior skull-volume measurement. Craniometry was developed by the eighteenth-century Dutch scholar Pieter Camper. 

While on the one hand, we can forgive these early scientists and anthropologists for their errors due to the limitations of their respective times, they are guilty of pursuing a science of racial difference. These ideas were espoused by some American founding fathers, including Thomas Jefferson. In "Notes on Virginia," Jefferson famously wrote about his views on Native Americans and blacks. While he deemed the natives "savages," as did many of his contemporaries, he insisted that they could be civilized into gentlemen -- that is, assimilated into whiteness. Blacks, on the other hand, he deemed incorrigible and too low on the scale of humanity to be assimilated into white American society. 

Arguably, the cause for this view is purely economic. Native Americans, due to mortal illness and obstinacy, had not lasted as a steady slave supply. Poor whites had immigrated to work as indentured servants, working only in exchange for the promise of a parcel of land. After the Industrial Revolution, which had made cotton a necessity in the textile mills of Britain and New England, as well as the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 which provided the United States with prime cotton-growing territory (i.e., Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and eastern Texas), there was no incentive to move away from slave-holding.

Whatever Jackson's personal moral discomfort may have been with slavery, if he possessed any at all, he probably thought it both politically and economically untenable for him and his Southern colleagues to support abolition.

Why doesn't Maniac Magee want to go to school in the book Maniac Magee?

As a little boy, Maniac Magee went to school like other children his age. When he ran away from his aunt and uncle's house, he left school behind. He did not return when he arrived in Two Mills.

When Grayson asks Maniac about going to school, the boy tells him that he refuses to go. Grayson asks him why. Ever since Maniac left his aunt and uncle's house, he had yearned for a home and an address of his own. To Maniac,

a school seems sort of like a big home, but only a day home, because then it empties out; and you can't stay there at night because it's not really a home, and you could never use it as your address, because an address is where you stay at night, where you walk right in the front door without knocking, where everybody talks to each other and uses the same toaster.

Maniac knows that if he goes to school in Two Mills, at the end of the day he will have no home to return to. The other children will go back home after school gets out each day. Maniac would be the only one with no home to return to. He decides that he will not attend school until he has a home to go back to at night.

What are the main features of the periodic classification of the elements?

Periodic classification of elements refer to the periodic table of elements in which elements have been arranged according to their atomic numbers and electronic configurations.

The periodic table of elements contain horizontal rows (known as periods) and vertical columns (known as groups). In all there are 7 periods and 18 groups in the periodic table. All the elements with similar electronic configuration are placed in the same vertical column or group. In a period, the atomic number of elements increases as we move from left to the right side of the periodic table. 

This classification ensures that we have some idea about the properties of an element by knowing its position in the table. There are also blank spaces in the periodic table for yet-to-be discovered elements. 

Thus, a periodic table of elements is very useful to students and scientists and anybody else who is working with elements.

Hope this helps.

Please provide a character sketch of Margot Frank from Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl.

Anne's sister, Margot Frank, is sixteen years old in 1942. She is a lot like her mother who is anxious and overwhelmed by stress at times. For example, when the Franks first move into the secret annex, Mrs. Frank and Margot both crash due to the stress and strain over going into hiding. Anne says that while she and her father tidied up the place and unpacked boxes, "Mummy and Margot were not in a fit state to take part; they were tired and lay down on their beds . . . Mummy and Margot were too tired and keyed up to eat" (19). This shows the first in a pattern in the Frank family--Mrs. Frank and Margot are gentle and sensitive, while Mr. Frank and Anne are strong and energetic. 

Margot is also very smart and humble. She does very well in all school subjects, but she never gloats about it to her sister. In fact, Margot supports Anne by encouraging her to do her best in school as well. In the entry dated 2 September, 1942, Anne summarizes her mother's views about Margot as follows:

"Margot has read quite a lot of serious books, and does not go in search of things that are forbidden her . . . Margot is far more developed and intelligent, shown by the fact of her being in the fourth form at school" (26).

Margot never complains, either. She washes all of the dishes sometimes, even when it isn't her turn. She doesn't argue with people like Anne does; she doesn't gossip; she doesn't ask personal questions; and, she doesn't seek to rebel at times. All of the traits that Margot doesn't express are exactly the ones that Anne does. If it weren't for the fact that Anne's parents have asked her to act like Margot, she probably would have looked up to her more. As it is, Anne becomes jealous of Margot's loving and respectful relationship with Mrs. Frank and seems to block them both from her life as best as one can living in such close quarters. 

In To Kill a Mockingbird, what changes Scout?

To Kill a Mockingbird is a bildungsroman, or a coming-of-age story. The book chronicles the many events that teach Scout about the world around her, which is Maycomb, Alabama in the 1930s. The question might not necessarily be what changes Scout, but how she changes throughout the course of the novel. As Scout learns about racism, prejudice, and discrimination, she is constantly faced with choices about how she will react and what she will believe. Will she grow up to be a product of her hometown, or will she be influenced more by the example of her father, who shows patience and tolerance towards everyone? Ultimately, the most influential person in Scout's development is her father. A close second would be her brother, Jem, because she watches and learns from his example as they both encounter the same events growing up. If, however, one event must be chosen that "changes" Scout, it would be the Tom Robinson trial.

First, the Tom Robinson case brings up many discussions between the children and their father about the traditional and prejudiced beliefs of Maycomb (and the whole South for that matter), which are not consistent with logic or reason. For example, Scout learns in chapter 23 that Tom was convicted based on racism and loyalty to tradition rather than logical evidence. Then, she learns to identify situations where inconsistencies with logic exist. Scout demonstrates her developed ability to reason when she identifies an inconsistency with what her third grade teacher, Miss Gates, says about Hitler and his treatment of Jews. Scout asks Jem about it in chapter 26 by saying the following:

"Well, coming out of the courthouse that night Miss Gates . . . was talking with Miss Stephanie Crawford. I heard her say it's time somebody taught 'em a lesson, they were gettin' way above themselves, an' the next thing they think they can do is marry us. Jem, how can you hate Hitler so bad an' then turn around and be ugly about folks right at home—" (247).

Scout is just beginning to use these reasoning skills, and she can't quite articulate that Miss Gates is a hypocrite, but this passage shows her developing her intellect and her ability to identify inconsistencies in logic. Before the trial, Scout said things such as, "Well Dill, after all he's just a Negro" (199). After all the information and education she gained through discussions at home about the Tom Robinson trial, and how white people have treated black folks with prejudice for decades, Scout is more aware of the condition of her society. She understands that prejudice of any kind is inexcusable and she eventually chooses to be patient and tolerant like her father.

How do the practices of Christianity and Judaism differ?

While Christianity can be said to stem from Judaism, since the primary religious figure, Jesus Christ, was a Jew, there are a few key differences between the two. Most importantly is the role of Jesus Christ himself. Christians believe that Jesus is the son of God, the savior prophesied to save the world from its sins. Jews, however, do not believe that Jesus is this savior, as their understanding of the prophecy was that the savior would be a warrior who would lead them to the promised land. As such, Jesus does not play a strong role in the Jewish theology, and any holy days associated with Jesus (Christmas, Easter, Advent, Lent, and several other Catholic holy days of obligation) do not exist in the Jewish calendar.

Furthermore, the central religious texts belonging to the two faiths differ in that the Christian Bible is significantly longer than the Jewish Torah. In fact, the first five books of the Christian Bible, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (known as the Pentateuch), are in fact the Jewish Torah. However, the first half of the Christian Bible, the Old Testament, also plays a part as a religious text in the Jewish faith. The main difference is the fact that the New Testament, the latter half of the Christian Bible, is not considered a religious text in the Jewish faith, as it follows the life of Jesus Christ. For a more extensive and theological explanation of the differences between the Bible and the Torah, check the first link below.

Beyond these more theological differences, the Jewish and Christian traditions can be very different. In the Jewish tradition, the transition into adulthood is celebrated at thirteen by a Bar Mitzvah for boys and at twelve by a Bat Mitzvah for girls. In the Christian tradition, the Holy Sacrament of Confirmation is a similar celebration; however, it does not necessarily mark entrance into adulthood, but rather full membership within the Church, and is done at different ages depending on the branch of Christianity. Another difference occurs in traditions regarding death and burial. While expediency with regards to the internment of the body, as well as care that the body is intact, are crucial to the Jewish faith, Christians do not have any rules regarding how soon the body is to be buried. Furthermore, while Christians have a particular format for the funeral service (Catholics especially), Jews have a much more prescribed set of rituals to be followed to ensure the soul can return to its Source, which include the Taharah, in which the body is ritually cleansed, and Levayah, which is the funerary service. For more in-depth descriptions regarding the various traditions, follow the second link below for Christian traditions and the third link for Jewish traditions.

In To Kill a Mockingbird, why does Atticus hide the fact that he had been appointed to defend Tom, and how does this action make Scout feel about...

In chapter 16 of To Kill a Mockingbird, Scout overhears some men at the courthouse talking about the fact that Atticus was appointed by Judge Taylor to take the Tom Robinson case. The men are called the Idlers' Club because they hang around the courthouse watching court proceedings. One of the men jokes about how Atticus reads too much. Another man says that Atticus only thinks he knows what he's doing. Then, someone reminds the men that Atticus was appointed by the judge to defend Tom. The final remark, however, demonstrates what many people in Maycomb feel about Atticus's appointment: "Yeah, but Atticus aims to defend him. That's what I don't like about it" (163).

This news is bittersweet for Scout. She feels that if she had known that her father was told to defend Tom Robinson, and that it wasn't his choice, then she could have used that information to defend Atticus to Francis, Cecil Jacobs, and others. She thinks that maybe the family would have been able to avoid some of the persecution they endured for almost a year. Scout is pretty confused about the situation, but if she could recall at that moment the times that Atticus explained why he was determined to do a good job on the case, she may not have been confused. For example, when Atticus tells Scout in chapter 9 that some people think he shouldn't defend Tom, she asks why he is doing it. His answer is as follows:

"For a number of reasons . . . The main one is, if I didn't I couldn't hold up my head in town, I couldn't represent this county in the legislature, I couldn't even tell you or Jem not to do something again" (75).

Atticus does not tell his children that he is appointed to defend Tom because it is the right thing to do in his mind anyway. He doesn't "hide" it from his kids because it is irrelevant. He simply doesn't talk about it because, appointed or not, Atticus takes the case because he wants to give Tom Robinson a real, quality defense, not a pretend one created just for show.

If imperialism had not taken place would the history of the world be different?

Imperialism is the desire for land beyond a country’s borders. It usually means one country is controlling another country, economically and politically. While this is a question subject to personal opinion, it is fair to state and to support that the history of the world would very likely be different if imperialism didn’t play a role.

European countries had a significant interest in the Americas because of the resources that existed. The Europeans established colonies throughout the Americas to have access to these resources. They also benefited from the trade that existed with their colonies. The Americas might be very different today if the Europeans weren’t interested in controlling land beyond their borders.

There are other examples to consider when adopting this opinion. The United States wanted to gain land beyond its borders in the late 1800s. This led to the Spanish-American War. If we weren’t that interested in getting land, we probably wouldn’t have taken an interest in what was happening to the people of Cuba at the hands of the Spanish. The Spanish-American War probably wouldn’t have occurred.

Both World War I and World War II had imperialism as a cause. Countries had been getting land beyond their borders because there were economic, political, and military benefits to doing this. This led a country like Germany, which became a united country around 1870, to want to get involved. However, most lands were already colonized. The only way for Germany to get more land was by going to war against the countries that had these lands. The desire for land motivated Germany in both World War I and World War II.

It is fair to conclude that the world would be different today if countries weren’t imperialistic.

How are volcanic islands created by the motion of crustal plates over the mantle?

Volcanic islands are formed as a crustal tectonic plate containing an ocean moves over a magma hot spot. These hot spots are actually in the mantle, while the tectonic plates are all in the crust (hence "crustal"), so the hot spot stays in the same place while the plate moves over it. This magma carries an enormous amount of heat, and it can then be released into the crust and create magma chambers there.

These magma chambers build up over millions of years and then finally erupt into volcanoes. They start at the sea floor, erupting lava directly into the sea which rapidly cools and hardens into rock. Over many eruptions (or sometimes a few very long slow, continuous eruptions), the rock builds up in layers, until eventually it can reach the surface.

Once the rock starts reaching the surface, it forms land, and that is what we call a volcanic island.

Volcanic islands are often formed in chains, as different parts of the plate are exposed to the magma hot spot in sequence.

Because of their mode of formation, volcanic islands usually have gradually sloping terrain and rich soil, making them very good for farming.

How does Shakespeare present Macbeth's state of mind in Act V, Scene 3?

On the one hand, Macbeth is still very confident (overly so) in the prophecies of the witches. When his terrified servant comes to him with the news that an English force of over ten thousand men is massed outside Dunsinane, Macbeth curses the man for his fear, and reiterates that he is not himself afraid. He contemptuously dismisses the thanes who are fleeing his banners to those of the English, and he threatens to hang any man who shows fear. He is also aware, somehow, that his days are numbered, as he reveals in a poignant soliloquy:

I have lived long enough. My way of life
Is fall'n into the sear, the yellow leaf,
And that which should accompany old age,
As honor, love, obedience, troops of friends,
I must not look to have; but, in their stead,
Curses, not loud but deep, mouth-honor, breath,
Which the poor heart would fain deny and dare not.

Macbeth is resolved, as he says, to "fight. . . 'til from my bones the flesh be hack'd." He also launches into a tirade when the Doctor reveals that he is unable to treat Lady Macbeth for the mental collapse she has experienced. Macbeth is clearly very agitated. He claims to be without fear, and shows open scorn for those who are afraid before the battle. His behavior reveals a man who seems to recognize that his world is falling apart around him.

Why do you think Tuck, in Tuck Everlasting by Natalie Babbitt, does not like the idea of never dying?

Several reasons come to mind as to why Tuck might not like the idea of living forever in Tuck Everlasting by Natalie Babbitt. Many of us think that the idea of immortality is intriguing, but if we stopped and really thought about it, we just might change our minds. Tuck already has figured out some of those things. If he falls in love, for example, and his love ages naturally and someday dies, he will watch all this as his young self. He watches people come and go throughout time.

He and his family also have to be fairly constantly on the move to avoid being "found out." If they stay in one place too long, people are going to begin to notice that they never age. How hard it must be for Tuck to feel he can never get too comfortable anywhere, to never be able to get to close to anyone lest they discover his "secret." At one point in the book, the author writes,

"For some, time passes slowly. An hour can seem like an eternity. For others, there was never enough. For Jesse Tuck, it didn't exist (Babbitt).

While the world changes around him, Tuck will remain unchanged. That would have to be difficult to accept.

What were the social and political effects of the Industrial Revolution on the United States?

I will assume this question is for United States history and industrialism's impact on America.  The Industrial Revolution had a profound impact on the way Americans lived. As factories became more numerous in the cities of the northeast, many people moved to these urban areas.  In general, the United States shifted from its rural roots and became an urban culture. Because early industrialism was centered in the northern states, and the southern states continued to view agriculture as its bread-and-butter, sectional rivalries grew. These rivalries would become irreconcilable over time, leading to a Civil War.

The period after the Civil War is when industrialism really took off. Industrialization motivated millions of immigrants from Europe to move to the United States.  This changed the cultural makeup of this country in a profound way.  Each immigrant group brought parts of its culture to the states.  The increased populations of the cities caused a number of problems for political leaders in those cities.  For the most part, civic leaders failed to meet the housing and infrastructure needs of the larger population.  Millions of Americans lived in squalor in overcrowded tenement houses.  Over time, many questioned the unfairness of how factory workers were paid and what they were expected to do for their jobs.  They worked long, hard hours in dangerous conditions for very little pay.

All of these problems brought about by industrialism led to a powerful political movement known as the Progressive Movement.  The movement attempted to make government more responsive, while also dealing with the poor treatment of urban workers.  Both political parties had members that identified themselves as Progressives.  A variety of laws were passed to improve the living conditions of urban factory workers during the early Twentieth Century.  

What did Genesis mean to its most ancient audience? What did Genesis tell its ancient readers?

This is a huge question, but I will rely on the work of theologian Walter Brueggemann in his book Genesis: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, which focuses on preaching Genesis within a modern context but also provides an account of how ancient Israelite theologians structured Genesis to reflect their own worldview.

Genesis, which was actually one of the later books of the Old Testament to be composed, contains a creation myth that explains the ancient Israelite view of the universe. Unlike other Near East creation narratives, Genesis focused on the idea that creation is good in and of itself. This concept is central to ancient Jewish thought: the material world is not some evil or some illusion that we need to rid ourselves of to attain connection with the godhead, but is a reflection of God and his goodness. Likewise, humans, as part of God's creation, are good. As Brueggemann puts it: "The world has been positively valued by God for itself" (13). Humans, therefore, are to value creation. This differs from, for example, a Platonist notion that sees the world as a shadow of an eternal perfection existing outside of the world.  

Genesis, reflecting ancient Israelite theology, states that God had a will and purpose for creation and that creation only exists for the sake of God's purpose. Creation is of God and for God. The Israelites, says Brueggemann, had a "new thought," a fresh intellectual exercise, that included mythology—a creation story—but still allowed humans a place in shaping the ongoing story of creation. Creator and creation interact. The creator speaks to its creation: "Language is decisive for the being of the world" (18). Further, God's call on creation is a command, but it is also "evocative" rather than "coercive" (18). As we see in the stories told in Genesis, humans can and do deny God's call.

A second important feature of Genesis to ancient Israelites was in its emphasis on covenants. God makes a specific call to Abraham and Sarah in history, wanting them to enter into a community with him and create Israel, a society that is "to fashion an alternative community in [a] creation gone awry" (105). Through his covenant with Israel, God, who is the same God who created the world, will use Israel to redeem the world and bring it back in alignment with his will. God enters into a covenant (mutual obligation) with Abraham and Sarah because they are receptive to his will and his promises (106). They will obey him and he will bless them and their descendants. The ancient Israelites expected to obey but also to be rewarded for their obedience.

In sum, ancient Israelite theologians in Genesis affirmed that God created the world, that material creation was good, that God created the world for a purpose and was involved in his creation through speaking to his creatures, that his creatures were expected but not forced to obey him, and  that God entered into a covenant relationship with Abraham and his descendants so they would be God's chosen people to redeem the world.

In what ways did the Wampanoag help the colonists survive?

In short, the Wampanoag tribe of Native Americans (and especially the famous Squanto, whose actual name was Tisquantum) aided the Pilgrims by helping them learn about crops, land, and the Massachusetts climate.  This helped establish a peaceful relationship between the two groups of people.

The Wampanoag, specifically through Squanto, also became the "middleman" between the Pilgrims and the Massasoit.  This was a much better position than the Wampanoag being the enemies of the Mi'kmaq tribe (a serious problem before the Pilgrims arrived).

The Wampanoag, through Squanto, further helped the Pilgrims in translation to Native American speech.  Squanto acquired this ability when he was captured as a slave and subsequently freed.  Squanto's translation services to the Pilgrims helped initiate a peace agreement.  It also helped to initiate the "First Thanksgiving," where the two groups simply got together after the harvest and feasted.  

Should the peasants of England have bothered to rebel in 1381?

Probably not, but hindsight is 20/20.

Wat Tyler's rebellion in 1381 was largely triggered by the poll tax levied to pay for the war with France, as well as the perception that the king's ministers (not the king himself!) were responsible for their economic misery and deserved to be punished---some said even beheaded. They also had some more general demands for reduced economic inequality.

But the rebellion was quite small, and failed very quickly; in about a month it was completely suppressed and the leaders were executed. Almost none of their demands were met, and in fact the government cracked down on peasants even harder, making things worse.

So, with the benefit of hindsight, it seems like the revolt was probably not a good idea. But at the time, that was probably a lot less clear. Other peasant revolts had succeeded to various degrees in the past; many of their objectives were sensible and popular; and even the targeting of the king's ministers rather than the king himself probably seemed like a sound strategy at the time. Even if they knew they probably wouldn't win, apparently enough people were simply fed up enough with the current system that they were willing to take the chance.

In Twelfth Night, what makes the three final couples well-matched? How do they compare to the couples who do not end up matched?

Sir Toby and Maria are well-matched because they both enjoy life, and they seem to think alike.  Sir Toby is above Maria is station, but he does not care.  He loves her.  She understands him, and there are probably few people who do.  She is willing to match his drinking, singing, and carousing.  It is a love match.

Olivia and Sebastian are a more unconventional couple.  Olivia first falls in love with Sebastian’s twin sister when she thinks Viola is Cesario.  Apparently, there are enough similarities between the twins that Olivia’s affections are easily transferred. She thinks she is marrying Cesario at first.  Sebastian goes along with the marriage because Olivia is rich and pretty.  When he sees his sister, he realizes what has happened.

SEBASTIAN

[To OLIVIA] So comes it, lady, you have been mistook:
But nature to her bias drew in that.
You would have been contracted to a maid;
Nor are you therein, by my life, deceived,
You are betroth'd both to a maid and man. (Act 5, Scene 1)

That leaves Viola and Orsino.  Viola loved Orsino from the beginning, but she could not tell him because she was pretending to be Ceasrio, and apparently Orsino never noticed she was not a boy.  At the same time, he came to appreciate Cesario/Viola’s wit, and even though he used her to woo Olivia he seemed to enjoy her company.  Viola, for her part, wished she could just tell him the truth.  She tells him, in a way, pretending to describe her sister.

VIOLA

A blank, my lord. She never told her love,
But let concealment, like a worm i' the bud,
Feed on her damask cheek: she pined in thought,
And with a green and yellow melancholy
She sat like patience on a monument,
Smiling at grief. Was not this love indeed? (Act 2, Scene 4)

The matches that do not work out are with Olivia, and they are all one-sided and superficial.  Toby's friend Sir Andrew wants to marry her just because she is wealthy.  She barely knows he is alive.  Malvolio also wants to marry her, but she thinks of him as a servant.  Maria, Andrew, and Toby trick him into thinking she returns his affections.  Orsino seems to be infatuated with Olivia, but again barely knows her.   The least superficial of the failed matches is Olivia and Cesario.  She likes "him" for his wit.  She falls in love with him despite herself, actually.  He reminds her what it is like to feel again, since she has been locking herself away in mourning.

Is "How tender 'tis to love the babe that milks me" from Macbeth a pathetic fallacy, personification, or a metaphor?

William Shakespeare's Macbeth presents two of drama's all-time villains: Macbeth and his wife, Lady Macbeth.

Lady Macbeth becomes obsessed with the desire for power when she learns that witches have prophesied Macbeth's ascension to the throne of Scotland. When Macbeth tries to back out of their plan to assassinate King Duncan, Lady Macbeth chillingly declares:

I have given suck, and know

How tender ’tis to love the babe that milks me.

I would, while it was smiling in my face,

Have plucked my nipple from his boneless gums

And dashed the brains out, had I so sworn as you

Have done to this.

Lady Macbeth is saying that she has nursed a child and knows how emotional the experience is. She goes on to say that rather than go back on her word, she would be willing to beat the nursing child's brains out. That's a pretty dramatic (and heartless) statement.

So, is the statement a pathetic fallacy, another kind of personification, or a metaphor?

A pathetic fallacy is created when we attribute human emotions to something that is not human. Well, cold and evil as she may be, Lady Macbeth is still human, so that's not it.

Personification is a more general term than pathetic fallacy, but it still involves attributing human qualities to a non-human, so once again the fact that Lady Macbeth is human eliminates that choice.

A metaphor is a comparison of two unlike things that is not literally true. Writers create them to add a shade of meaning to their characters or descriptions. This doesn't seem to apply either, with one possible exception. It is never made clear whether or not Lady Macbeth is or ever has really been a mother. She certainly doesn't act like one. So if in fact she has never had a child, her statement that she has “given suck” might be meant in the figurative sense. Perhaps she is just saying that she can “imagine” the emotions involved. If so, you might be able to make a case for calling this a metaphor.

Would a student be allowed to present information on flat earth theory in a science fair?

Firstly, it's important to acknowledge that "Flat Earth" is not a theory at all. In fact, the group of people who make up the "Flat Earth Society" rely on a hypothesis that has already been proven to be incorrect. A very, very long history of scientists (astronomers, physicists, geographers, etc..) have demonstrated that Earth is an oblate spheroid. Although this point was argued hundreds (and even thousands) of years ago, it is no longer up for scientific debate. Our current knowledge is very, very certain that the Earth is not flat.

Since a science fair is an opportunity to present current science (and new knowledge), it would not be appropriate to present "Flat Earth" as scientific fact. It wouldn't even be appropriate to present "Flat Earth" as a topic of true debate— at least not among scientists. On the other hand, if the point of presenting the "Flat Earth" hypothesis is to point out the things we know to be incorrect, then you might bring it up. You might also bring it up as a standing example of how some people present things as factual debates, when really there is no debate at all among experts.

Why would war be used to gain territory and increase power?

As a general matter, people in a given territory are not going to willingly hand over their land to another nation.  This means that if a nation wants a particular territory, it is likely that a war will be necessary.  There are means of conquering a people economically, for example, by investing so heavily in a region that one controls a substantial amount of economic activity, production of goods and services, and hiring and firing, for instance.  Nevertheless, that is a form of war, too.  People want autonomy, not another nation taking over and telling them what to do. There have been few if any instances of a people handing over the keys to a kingdom when a foreign power comes knocking.  But there is a wonderful satire called The Mouse That Roared (Arnold) in which a country in dire financial straits declares war on the United States, wanting to lose, so it can enjoy the American largess historically available to countries the United States has defeated. Generally, though, war is the only way to gain a new territory.   

What is the definition of assassination?

Assassination is the act of assassinating somebody.  That does not help too much, so let me define "assassinate" instead.  The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines "assassinate" in the following manner. 

to kill (someone, such as a famous or important person) usually for political reasons

Some synonyms that are listed are "kill," "execute," "slay," and "murder."  The important distinction for an assassination is that the person that is killed is politically important in some way.  That is why presidents, kings, and other important political leaders are assassinated, not murdered.  

The question that is posted here is linked to the novel The Wednesday Wars.  In that book, two assassinations take place, and both of them happen in 1968.  The first assassination is that of Martin Luther King Jr., which occurs during the April chapter.  The second assassination takes place during June, and that is the assassination of Robert Kennedy.  

How does Holmes's outlook on life at the beginning of "The Red-Headed League" compare or contrast with his outlook at the end of the story?

At the beginning of "The Red-Headed League," Holmes displays a positive and enthusiastic outlook on life. He speaks "cordially" to Watson, for example, and he refers to the narrative of his visitor, Jabez Wilson, as "one of the most singular" that he has heard for some time. In short, the "unique" facts of Wilson's story revitalize and rejuvenate Holmes.

By the end of the story, however, Holmes's outlook on life has changed significantly. His enthusiasm is replaced by "ennui" (boredom/ lethargy), and his thoughts return to the "commonplaces of existence." For Holmes, life is meaningless if he does not have an interesting and unique case to work on, and this is shown by the quote Holmes tells Watson: "L'homme c'est rien—l'oeuvre c'est tout." This roughly translates to "man is nothing and work is everything." This typifies Holmes's attitude at the end of the story: he feels like a man without purpose. 

How did Bud's prediction about his new foster home come true?

In chapter one of Bud, Not Buddy, Bud Caldwell is told that a foster family has been found for him.  The foster family would give Bud a new older brother. The orphanage worker is all smiles, because she thinks that going to a family that has an older brother for Bud is great news.  Unfortunately Bud knows better.  Bud tells his friend, Jerry, that a house with an older brother is a big problem.  Bud explains that the older brother is only going to want to fight and assert his dominance.  

"I'm the one who's going to have problems. A older boy is going to want to fight, but those little girls are going to treat you real good."

Bud's prediction comes true at the very beginning of chapter two.  The first three paragraphs describe in vivid detail how Todd Amos was attempting to beat Bud into a bloody pulp.  

I was having this thought because Todd Amos was hitting me so hard and fast that I knew that the blood squirting out of my nose was only the beginning of a whole long list of bad things that were about to happen to me.

Bud explains to his readers that Todd's barrage of punches and kicks was so severe that Bud simply gave up and didn't fight back.  Instead, Bud fell to the floor in the fetal position and tried to crawl under the bed.  

In Antigone, what is the penalty for breaking the decree set forth by Creon?

In Sophocles's tragic play Antigone, Creon, the ruler of Thebes, makes a decree that Polyneices's body will be subjected to public shame after the civil war led by the rivaling brothers (Polyneices and Eteocles) ends with both men dead. While Eteocles's body will be properly honored and handled, Polyneices will not receive holy rights and will go unburied so animals can pick at his carcass. 

Creon decides the consequence of breaking this decree is death. Despite this, Antigone risks her life to honor her brother's legacy by giving him a burial.

As a result, Creon has her imprisoned and then buried alive in a cave. These actions displease the gods, and the Chorus tries to warn Creon that Antigone should be freed. Unfortunately, Creon is too stubborn to listen; Antigone kills herself, causing suffering to fall upon the land.

With reference to the phrase, "unlucky thing you finding it," what 'luck' did the young man have in the story "Dusk"?

The young man who has fabricated a tale in order to finagle money from someone is unable to produce a bar of soap that he supposedly has purchased so his tale holds no verisimilitude. But, after he leaves, a bar is found beneath the bench on which he has been sitting.

In Saki's satirical story, "Dusk," a young man, who has woven a tall-tell about leaving his hotel in order to purchase a bar of soap, tells Norman Gortsby that he has forgotten his way back to the hotel where he stays, and unless someone gives him some money, he will have no place to sleep this night. However, when he cannot produce the soap as evidence of the verity of his story, Norman rejects his tale, gives him no money, and the young man hurriedly departs in anger at his oversight.

Afterwards, Norman Gortsby stands up from the park bench on which he has been, and he notices a cake of soap, wrapped in paper, under the bench on which he and the young man have sat. He hurries to catch the young man:

"The important witness to the genuineness of your story has turned up," said Gortsby, holding out the cake of soap; "it must have slid out of your overcoat pocket when you sat down on the seat."

Taking advantage of the credibility of Gortsby, who hands him a sovereign and his card along with instructions that the other can mail the money back to him, the young man says,

"Lucky thing your finding it,"...with a catch in his voice, he blurted out a word or two of thanks and fled headlong in the direction of Knightsbridge.

Norman Grotsby learns of his folly when the older man who has been on the end of the bench returns to search for his bar of soap.

What is the climax of the story "A Jury of Her Peers"?

The climax of Susan Glaspell's "A Jury of Her Peers," the moment of highest emotional intensity, occurs when Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale decide to hide the damning evidence of the dead bird.

Because of the remarks of the rather flippant county attorney and the chiming in by the other men, Mrs. Peters who is the wife of the sheriff, and Mrs. Hale who is a neighbor of the suspect, Minnie Foster, are rather resentful of the attitude that there are "just kitchen things" on the first floor. Other patronizing remarks such as Sheriff Peter's sarcasm about the women's being worried about Mrs. Foster's preserves also prompts the action of the climax.

In the course of looking around, Mrs. Hale finds a quilt that Minnie Foster was making which has neat stitching except for the last part that has erratic stitches. A perfectionist with regard to sewing, Mrs. Hale feels compelled to resew this part despite Mrs. Peters's fear that they should not touch things. Then, while Mrs. Peters looks for some paper with which to tie up the clothes and articles that Mrs. Foster has requested be brought to the jail, she finds a damaged bird cage whose one hinge has been pulled apart.

Their eyes met--startled, questioning, apprehensive. For a moment neither stirred or spoke.

Further, as Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale search in the kitchen cupboards for quilt pieces because of their decision to give the quilt to Mrs. Foster so that she can finish it, the women discover a pretty red box. Inside this box is something wrapped in a piece of silk. "It's the bird," Mrs. Peter whispers. "Somebody wrung its neck."

Clearly, the women have discovered subtle, but damning evidence regarding the murder of Mr. Foster. For, he was choked to death by a rope around his neck in the same fashion in which the poor bird has died. This bird's death has most likely been avenged by Mrs. Foster because it was the one thing in her desperate and lonely life that brought her any joy.

Soon after this discovery by the women left in the kitchen, the men descend the stairs. Once again, the county attorney jokes about the kitchen and its contents when the sheriff asks him if he needs to look through what Mrs. Peters has gathered to take to Mrs. Foster at the jail. In fact, it is with dramatic irony that the attorney facetiously replies, "I guess they're not very dangerous things the ladies have picked out."

Climax:

The county attorney's remarks precipitate the climax of the story:
After the attorney and the sheriff leave the kitchen to examine the windows and Mr. Hale goes out to tend the horses who have been waiting in the cold, the tension of the thoughts and emotions between Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters is high as they look into each other's eyes, and Mrs. Hale turns her eyes to the red box. Mrs. Peters rushes to the box, covering it with the quilt; she tries to put it in her purse, but the purse is too small. At the sound of a door knob turning,

Martha Hale snatched the box from the sheriff's wife, and got it in the pocket of her big coat just as the sheriff and the country attorney came back into the kitchen.

What is the meaning of the title Warriors Don't Cry?

This phrase comes from Melba Pattillo Beals's grandmother, who told her, "Even when the battle is long and the path is steep, a true warrior does not give up" (page 3). On the first day that Melba and the other students in the Little Rock Nine attempt to enter Central High School, they are prevented from doing so by a mob that isolates one of the students, Elizabeth Eckford. In response, Melba is understandably upset. Her grandmother, Grandma India, tells Melba that this will be the last time Melba cries. She says, "You're a warrior on the battlefield for your Lord. God's warriors don't cry 'cause they trust he's always on their side" (page 57). Her grandmother's words become a rallying cry for Melba, and she thinks of them often when she faces violence, harassment, and intimidation during the year she integrates Central High School with the other students in the Little Rock Nine. 

How can I get started writing an essay on justice in the book Holes by Louis Sachar?

Justice is one of the major themes in Louis Sachar's book Holes. To get started writing your essay, you might want to try doing some brainstorming by writing down what you already think or know about justice in this book, and what you want to explore more. Do you think justice was served in this book? Why or why not? To whom?

The characters in Holes are working at a camp for boys who have committed crimes or are otherwise troubled. Do you think justice is served by sending these boys to a labor camp? Maybe it is justice for some, but not for others. Do you think justice only impacted the boys, who are supposed criminals, or also the overseers like Mr. Sir? What about characters from the past, like Sam and Miss Barlow?

If you don't think justice was served in some case, how might things have gone differently? Has this book prompted you to think about justice in your own life?

When doing brainstorming work and answering these questions, don't be too concerned with making it sound nice-- just get your ideas out there! You can go back and clean up your writing during your editing process. Don't be afraid to write down whatever comes into your head!

In Act I of Arms and the Man, why does the man tell Raina to keep out of the way?

The man is trying to protect her. He intends to put up a fight when the soldiers enter the room, and he doesn't want her to get hurt in the crossfire.

This is in stark contrast with the impression of menace he tried to give when he first spoke to her. He had threatened to shoot her if she called out. When she suggested that she was unafraid of dying (and thus likely to cry out anyway), he changed the nature of his threat to something he was certain she'd care about -- her modesty and vanity. If she called out for help, soldiers would burst into the room and see her in her nightgown -- a state that was considered by Raina's contemporaries too undressed and indecent for receiving visitors, especially male visitors. The man had taken her cloak in order to ensure her silence.

But once it becomes clear that the soldiers have already entered the building, the man changes his manner. He had only pretended to be menacing or callous in order to fool her into compliance. In fact, he is a person of sensitivity and empathy.

He throws up his head with the gesture of a man who sees that it is all over with him, and, dropping the manner he has been assuming to intimidate her, flings the cloak to her, exclaiming, sincerely and kindly] No use: I'm done for. Quick! wrap yourself up: they're coming!

His instructions, "keep out of the way," are therefore in keeping with this newly-revealed persona. He assures her that the violence will not last long. He wants her to stay back so she won't get hurt.

What are three concepts found in the Magna Carta that influenced the Founding Fathers?

This is a potentially tricky question, because while 18th century thinkers were inspired by the Magna Carta, their notions of what was actually spelled out by that document were sometimes a bit off the mark.

For instance, because the Magna Carta stipulated that the Crown couldn't impose taxes without the "general consent of the realm," people in the American colonies believed that it set the precedent for "no taxation without representation."  

But as Claire Breav and Julian Harrison point out in their article for the British Library (see link below), this "general consent of the realm" referred to the consent of "leading barons and churchmen," not the citizenry at large.

Still, these words certainly contributed to the theory that governments shouldn't tax without consent. Likewise, other parts of the Magna Carta -- particularly Chapters 39 and 40 -- helped shape the thinking of the people who created the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Here are three key concepts found in the Magna Carta that influenced the founding fathers.

1. Due process or rule of law

Chapter 39 of the Magna Carta says:

"No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way…except…by the law of the land."

This wording is echoed in the Fifth Amendment, where it says:

"No person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

2. Trial by a jury of peers

Chapter 39 of the Magna Carta also mentions trial by jury -- the "lawful judgment of (an accused man's) equals." Eighteenth century thinkers believed this was a crucial liberty;  one of the complaints in the Declaration of Independence is that King George has often deprived Americans of it. The right to a jury trial is included in the Constitution and the Seventh Amendment.

3. The right to a speedy trial

Chapter 40 of the Magna Carta says:

"To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice."

This concept was incorporated into the Sixth Amendment which guarantees "...the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay…"

In The Outsiders, how does Pony fit in with the greasers and how does this connect to the title of the novel?

Pony fits in with the greasers because they are accepting of him even though he is different.

Pony is not the typical greaser.  He likes to watch movies and read, does well in school, and is a track star.  He does not enjoy fighting.  Despite these differences between him and the typical greaser, Pony is accepted by the greasers. They are his extended family.

Pony explains that greasers are known for wearing their hair long, and for getting into fights and getting in trouble with the law.  He says greasers are “wilder” than Socs.  However, Pony and his family try to stay out of trouble, and his oldest brother tries to keep them on the straight and narrow.

Since Mom and Dad were killed in an auto wreck, the three of us get to stay together only as long as we behave. So Soda and I stay out of trouble as much as we can, and we're careful not to get caught when we can't. (Ch. 1) 

Other than having a strict older brother as his guardian, Pony is different because he is sensitive and deep.  The other greasers recognize these differences, and other than sometimes teasing him they are respectful of the way Pony is.  The greasers are protective of him because he is different, and because he is young and has his whole life ahead of him.  The thought is that Pony can make something of himself, and will not have to always be a greaser. 

When it looks like there will be a fight between the Socs and greasers, Two-Bit gives Pony a broken bottle to use as a weapon.  A fight is avoided, but he later says he doesn’t know why he would give Pony the bottle. He wouldn’t use it.  Later, when preparing for the rumble, Two-Bit again expresses the opinion that Pony should not be fighting. 

"Ponyboy, listen, don't get tough. You're not like the rest of us and don't try to be..." (Ch. 12) 

This is not an insult.  Two-Bit and Johnny both want Pony to make something of himself other than what his greaser friends and family have.  They feel that Pony can use his intelligence and drive to get an education and get out of the neighborhood, because he is not fit for this kind of life. 

In the title, Pony refers to all of the greasers as outsiders because they are rejected by society.  The word “outsider” is plural.  However, he is kind of an outsider within his own gang.  There are other outsiders of different kinds.  Cherry is somewhat of an outsider for the Socs, because she thinks a little differently than they do and is even willing to talk to a greaser.  Johnny is an outsider within his family, because he feels that his parents do not care about him and he has no one.  All of these outsiders find comfort in each other, even though they are different.

Compare Hamlet's soliloquy at the end of Act IV, Scene 4, with the one in Act II, Scene 2. Based on his sentiments and the themes in these two...

In Act 2, Scene 2, Hamlet passes severe judgment on himself. His harsh criticism stems from what he believes to be cowardice. Hamlet made a solemn promise to his father's ghost that he would avenge his father's death at the earliest opportunity. Some time has already passed, but Hamlet has failed to fulfill his pledge.

Hamlet uses harsh terms in his self-criticism, comparing himself to an actor who can so easily appear sorrowful and anxious by merely thinking about something of no real importance to him:

...this player here,
But in a fiction, in a dream of passion,
Could force his soul so to his own conceit
That from her working all his visage wann'd,
Tears in his eyes, distraction in's aspect,
A broken voice, and his whole function suiting
With forms to his conceit? and all for nothing!

Hamlet cannot summon up enough courage to take revenge, though.

...Yet I,
A dull and muddy-mettled rascal, peak,
Like John-a-dreams, unpregnant of my cause,
And can say nothing; no, not for a king,
Upon whose property and most dear life
A damn'd defeat was made.

Hamlet thinks he is not driven enough and resents his ineptitude at this characteristic. He acknowledges he has plenty of reasons to spur him on but lacks the courage to act. Hamlet questions his mettle and, through a series of rhetorical questions, damns himself as his own worst critic. He concedes that he should accept this cruel condemnation, however, since he is a coward who lacks the will to enact retribution. 

Hamlet passionately expresses his contempt for Claudius:

With this slave's offal: bloody, bawdy villain!
Remorseless, treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain!

His apostrophic cry to vengeance is an indication of the torment he is suffering and heightens his sense of incompetence. He calls himself a fool and repeats that he has ample reason to act, stating that he has both malice and goodness to prompt him. Hamlet compares himself to a whore who expresses her anger by swearing and ranting and raving, and to a lowly servant who curses her resentment.

At the end of his impassioned monologue, Hamlet decides to use the actors in a play which, he believes, should provoke a reaction from Claudius that proves his guilt. Hamlet believes the king's response will provide better grounds for his revenge than mere words would:

the play's the thing
Wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king.

Although Hamlet is still quite critical of himself in Act IV, Scene 4, he is less harsh. He repeats that he has more than enough reason to enact his vengeance, but alludes to his lack of intent. He compares himself to a beast that only sleeps and feeds. He admits that he is not quite sure why he has not acted on his vow yet. He contemplates whether it is because he is mostly a coward or because he seeks and thinks too much about a perfect moment in which to commit the deed.

At this point, Hamlet concedes that he has the means, strength and will to avenge his father's death. In this sense, Hamlet's conviction is far greater than it was in his earlier soliloquy. Hamlet compares his situation with that of prince Fortinbras, who came to claim a piece of useless Polish soil as a matter of honor.

Witness this army of such mass and charge
Led by a delicate and tender prince,
Whose spirit with divine ambition puff'd
Makes mouths at the invisible event,
Exposing what is mortal and unsure
To all that fortune, death and danger dare,
Even for an egg-shell.

In this comparison, Hamlet states that greatness is not determined by the size of an issue that one challenges, but by one's moral purpose—there is virtue in fighting for something as a matter of honor. In this, Hamlet sees himself as having greater purpose. Why, then, should he let "it sleep?" Hamlet feels ashamed that twenty thousand men will die fighting for a plot of land which is not large enough to bury them all. In a determined declaration, Hamlet states,

O, from this time forth,
My thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!

There is a clear contrast in Hamlet's opinion of himself between the two monologues. In the first, his self-denunciation is powerful and he lacks a clear resolve. It appears his only desire is to create a scenario in which to confirm his stepfather's guilt. Although he is still mildly critical of himself in the second monologue, Hamlet appears to be much more positive and to have finally made up his mind to kill Claudius.

How old are you supposed to be to become an artist?

While being an artist can be seen as an “occupation,” it is most importantly a way of seeing the world, a visual (or auditory or verbal) sensitivity to the outside world, coupled with a desire to create something new, and a “work ethic” that prioritizes creativity over profit and fame. Art is “looking at things carefully,” as William Saroyan says, and an artist is someone who is sensitive to details more deeply than mere surface textures, shapes, colors, etc. (In music, the same things are true—rhythms, harmonies, and backgrounds; in verbal art, subtleties in sound, cadence, metaphor, figurative language). To your question, an artist is an “amateur” (literally "a lover of"), usually during youth and adolescence, often well into his/ her adult years. Of course, there are many exceptions (Mozart, for example), and young visual artists sometimes produce sellable work. The essence of your question speaks to the timetable for becoming a “successful” artist, one who devotes his/ her life to making something new, striking, and/ or memorable. In many cases, that concentration on one’s art results in some “commodity,” a sellable, remunerative “product” allowing the artist to make a living at it (Shakespeare, for all his artistic genius, was actually selling a commodity: live theatre). The age for this to happen can be any time.

How does social science work with other cultures?

The social sciences have a great deal of interest in different cultures: in fact, most fields in the social sciences (anthropology, psychology, etc) have a discipline called "cross-cultural studies" that looks at similarities and differences across cultures. 

Many studies in the social sciences today make a point of exploring hypotheses across cultures. Psychology, for example, has historically conducted studies and experiments using mostly educated, wealthy participants from Western countries. However, more recently, the field has made a big effort to include people of all ethnicities and from many different countries in their findings (although there are still a large number of studies conducted only on psychology undergraduates!). 

This work is very important because we need to find out whether our findings DO actually apply to people from many cultures, or whether our findings only apply to certain groups of people. In this way, the field of social sciences can help uncover truths and knowledge about people from many cultures. For example, a great deal of very interesting linguistic studies have been done with the Pirahã people of the Amazon basin. Their language is extraordinarily unique and has challenged many assumptions linguists previously had about the nature of all languages. 

Describe the situation in which Scout confronts prejudice in the classroom.

In Chapter 26, Cecil Jacobs speaks about how Hitler is persecuting the Jews in Europe during a current events activity in Scout's third-grade class. Scout's teacher, Mrs. Gates, tells the class that Hitler can get away with persecuting the Jews because he runs the government. She proceeds to explain that Germany is a dictatorship and America is a democracy. She then makes the comment, "Over here we don't believe in persecuting anybody. Persecution comes from people who are prejudiced" (Lee 151). Mrs. Gate's comment is both hypocritical and false. Scout recognizes Mrs. Gate's flawed reasoning because she realizes that African Americans are segregated and discriminated against in her own community. Scout recalls hearing Mrs. Gates make a racist comment about black people while she was leaving the courtroom, and questions Jem about how people can criticize Hitler when they are essentially doing the same thing. Mrs. Gate's hypocrisy illustrates how racist community members overlook their prejudice and do not recognize the inequality and injustice in their home town.

What are some advantages and disadvantages of cultural globalization?

There are at least two major advantages of cultural globalization.  First, cultural globalization broadens the range of cultural experiences that we can have.  Before globalization, we were only able to partake of our own culture.  As globalization has continued, we have come to be able to enjoy aspects of many other cultures.  Here in the United States, I can eat foods from many different countries.  I can watch cricket from India and soccer from England on TV.  I can watch music videos from South Korea.  We can all watch Harry Potter movies, made by an American studio from books by an English woman.  Because of cultural globalization, we can have a much richer cultural life.

Cultural globalization, we can argue, has also spread democratic values and respect for human rights.  Globalization has encouraged people in many countries to think about things like the rights of women.  It has exposed people to ideas of toleration and freedom of religion.  These values are not universally accepted, but they are more prevalent now than they were before cultural globalization began.

There is one major downside to cultural globalization.  This is the possibility that cultural globalization is destroying unique cultural practices in various countries and thereby reducing the amount of cultural diversity that exists in the world.  This process is sometimes known as cultural imperialism.  People who believe that this is going on feel that certain cultures (particularly that of the United States) are coming to dominate the world.  They point to things like McDonald’s restaurants springing up in many countries around the world and say that these things drive out local cuisines.  They say that American values on things like sexuality are being forced on other countries by American movies, TV, music, and other media.

As cultural globalization continues, people argue over whether it is a good thing.  On the one hand, it gives people more options and spreads what some would call good values.  On the other, it can lead to cultural imperialism and the spread of American (and some other cultures) including the negative aspects of those cultures.  

What are the most important issues I should discuss in an essay on the history of slaves in America from Columbus' time up until now?

The main period of slavery in the United States occurred between the early 17th century through the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. Of course, some illegal slavery was still happening after the law changed: the film 12 Years a Slave documents the true story of a free-born African-American who was captured from the Northeast and sold into slavery on a Southern plantation.

Trying to capture the history of slavery in America in one general thesis statement is a challenge, as there are many complex issues to discuss. Would you be able to make your thesis address a more specific aspect of slavery? For example, one aspect of slavery that is important is the divide in opinion between the Union states and the Confederacy, and this disagreement became the basis for the Civil War.

Your main points could include issues such as farming: the growth of certain crops in the Confederate states relied heavily upon slave labor, such as cotton and tobacco, and to this day, those crops and their history are associated with the African slave trade in the United States. This was a large problem because the Southern states had an economy that relied upon slavery (or the use of slaves for inexpensive labor) to function. The North, however, had less need of slaves for economic prosperity, and it began to be seen an elitist and barbaric practice, to employ human beings as slaves, especially when it meant treacherous journeys by sea to steal people from their homelands in Africa and the Caribbean.

The Industrial Revolution occurred more widely in the Northeast because of the greater density of city population and the longer history of settlement, since the settlers of New England were the first to establish towns and later cities and these became the basis for the first Colonies. Therefore, the options for economic growth and industry were more diverse; whereas it was thought by many that the South's main industry was based in agriculture, which relied upon cheap labor, and many farms and plantations relied upon slaves to grow their businesses. This was part of the justification that led the Confederacy to fight to keep slavery going.

Other points to be made about slavery in America include the formation of African-American culture that occurred as a result of the arrival of so many Africans to North America: the effort to maintain tribal ways of religion, language, foodways and other cultural practices became very difficult for transplanted Africans, who were often expected to become Christians and learn English, and many slaves were punished if they tried to engage in their customs.

The history timeline included in the link below offers many important points about slavery, including different pieces of legislation related to slavery, and the main events of the Civil War.

How does Cocteau’s play preserve the original myth of Oedipus?

Cocteau’s play reiterates the main story in the myth of Oedipus. In both Cocteau’s play and the original myth, Oedipus ended up unknowingly killing his father and marrying his mother just as it was foretold. The play also stays true to some of the significant aspects of the myth.

In the play and just like in the myth, Oedipus is abandoned as a baby because of what is prophesied about his future. A shepherd finds him abandoned in the mountains and takes pity on him. He delivers him to King Polybius and Queen Merope of Corinth, who had a childless marriage. Oedipus then visits Delphi and learns of his fate in connection to his parents. Oedipus decides not to go back to Corinth believing his fate applied to King Polybius and his wife. However, his action to never return to Corinth pushes him towards the actual fulfillment of his fate. Oedipus ends up killing his father, King Laius, on his way towards Thebes. Oedipus also ends up marrying the queen and his biological mother, Jocasta. After the truth is revealed, Jocasta commits suicide and Oedipus blinds himself.

`int_2^3 (2x-3)/sqrt(4x-x^2) dx` Find or evaluate the integral by completing the square

Recall  that `int_a^b f(x) dx = F(x)|_a^b` :

`f(x)` as the integrand function

`F(x) ` as the antiderivative of `f(x)`

"a" as the lower boundary value of x

"b" as the upper boundary value of x

To evaluate the given problem: `int_2^3 (2x-3)/sqrt(4x-x^2)dx` , we need to determine the

 indefinite integral F(x)  of the integrand: `f(x)=(2x-3)/sqrt(4x-x^2)` .

We apply completing the square on `4x-x^2` .

Factor out `(-1)`  from `4x-x^2` to get `(-1)(x^2-4x)`

The `x^2-4x` or `x^2-4x+0` resembles `ax^2+bx+c` where:

`a= 1` and `b =-4` that we can plug-into `(-b/(2a))^2` .

`(-b/(2a))^2= (-(-4)/(2*1))^2`

              `= (4/2)^2`

              ` = 2^2`

              ` =4`

To complete the square, we add and subtract 4 inside the ():

`(-1)(x^2-4x) =(-1)(x^2-4x+4 -4)`

Distribute (-1) in "-4" to move it outside the ().

`(-1)(x^2-4x+4 -4) =(-1)(x^2-4x+4) + (-1)(-4)`

                          `=(-1)(x^2-4x+4) + 4`

Apply factoring for the perfect square trinomial: `x^2-4x+4 = (x-2)^2`

`(-1)(x^2-4x+4) + 4 =-(x-2)^2 + 4`

                                     ` = 4-(x-2)^2`

which means `4x-x^2=4-(x-2)^2`

Applying it to the integral:

`int_2^3 (2x-3)/sqrt(4x-x^2)dx =int_2^3 (2x-3)/sqrt(4-(x-2)^2)dx`

To solve for the indefinite integral of `int (2x-3)/sqrt(4-(x-2)^2)du` ,

let `u =x-2` then `x = u+2` and `du= dx` .

Apply u-substitution , we get:

`int (2x-3)/sqrt(4-(x-2)^2)dx= int (2(u+2)-3)/sqrt(4-u^2)du`

                             `=int (2u+4-3)/sqrt(4-u^2)du`

                             `=int (2u+1)/sqrt(4-u^2)du`

 Apply the basic integration property: `int (u+v) dx = int (u) dx + int (v) dx` .  

  `int (2u+1)/sqrt(4-u^2)du =int (2u)/sqrt(4-u^2)du +int1/sqrt(4-u^2)du`

For the integration of the first term: `int (2u)/sqrt(4-u^2)du` ,

let `v = 4-u^2` then `dv = -2u du` or `-dv = 2u du` then it becomes:

`int (2u)/sqrt(4-u^2)du =int (-1)/sqrt(v)dv`

Applying radical property: `sqrt(x) = x^(1/2)` and  Law of exponent: `1/x^n = x^-n` , we get:

`(-1)/sqrt(v) =(-1)/v^(1/2)`

Then,

`int (-1)/sqrt(v)dv =int(-1)v^(-1/2) dv`

Applying Power Rule of integration: `int x^n dx = x^(n+1)/(n+1)`

`int (-1)v^(-1/2) dv = (-1)v^(-1/2+1)/(-1/2+1)`

                         `=(-1)v^(1/2)/(1/2)`

                        `=(-1)v^(1/2)*(2/1)`

                         `=-2v^(1/2)`

                         `= -2sqrt(v)`

Recall `v =4-u^2 then-2sqrt(v)=-2sqrt(4-u^2)` .

Then,

`int (2u)/sqrt(4-u^2)du =-2sqrt(4-u^2)`

For the integration of the second term:  `int1/sqrt(4-u^2)du` ,

 we apply the basic integration formula for inverse sine function:

`int 1/sqrt(a^2-u^2) du = arcsin(u/a)`

Then,

`int1/sqrt(4-u^2)du=int1/sqrt(2^2-u^2)du`

                    `= arcsin(u/2)`

 For the complete indefinite integral, we combine the results as:

`int (2u+1)/sqrt(4-u^2)du =-2sqrt(4-u^2) +arcsin(u/2)`

 Then plug-in `u=x-2` to express it terms of x, to solve for `F(x)` .

`F(x) =-2sqrt(4-(x-2)^2) +arcsin((x-2)/2)`

For the definite integral, we applying the boundary values: `a=2` and `b=3` in `F(x)|_a^b= F(b) - F(a)` .

`F(3) -F(2) = [-2sqrt(4-(3-2)^2) +arcsin((3-2)/2)] -[-2sqrt(4-(2-2)^2) +arcsin((2-2)/2)]`

       `=[-2sqrt(4-(1)^2) +arcsin(1/2)] -[-2sqrt(4-(0)^2) +arcsin(0/2)]`

        `=[-2sqrt(3) +arcsin(1/2)] -[-2sqrt(4) +arcsin(0)]`

         ` =[-2sqrt(3) +pi/6] -[-2*(2)+0]`

        `=[-2sqrt(3) +pi/6] -[-4]`

         `=-2sqrt(3) +pi/6 + 4`

Mrs. Baker starts assigning the plays of which bard in The Wednesday Wars?

Mrs. Baker begins assigning Shakespeare's plays to Holling Hoodhood.  

Holling Hoodhood is forced to go to Mrs. Baker's classroom every Wednesday afternoon because he doesn't attend Catholic Catechism or Hebrew school like the rest of his classmates do. Holling isn't happy about the situation, and Mrs. Baker definitely isn't happy about the situation. She even tries to have Holling repeat the previous year's math class because it meets during the same period.  

When Holling and Mrs. Baker begin spending their Wednesday afternoons together, Mrs. Baker has Holling do menial tasks like cleaning desks and chalkboards. After the first month, though, Mrs. Baker announces she and Holling will begin going through a Shakespeare play each month. Holling thinks the arrangement is just about the worst thing imaginable; however, over the course of the school year, Holling learns to enjoy Shakespeare.

In "The Rocking-Horse Winner" by D.H. Lawrence, what does Paul keep hearing the house whisper?

The author D. H. Lawrence takes the position that children can see and hear things that are no longer visible or audible to adults after they reach a certain age and become immersed in worldly problems. What Paul and his two sisters keep imagining they are hearing is the whole house expressing a need for more money, which is really only being felt by their mother.

And so the house came to be haunted by the unspoken phrase: There must be more money! There must be more money! The children could hear it all the time though nobody said it aloud. They heard it at Christmas, when the expensive and splendid toys filled the nursery. Behind the shining modern rocking-horse, behind the smart doll's house, a voice would start whispering: "There must be more money! There must be more money!"

Paul takes the childish course of riding his rocking-horse in the hope that it will take him to "where the luck is," because his mother has told him they are short on money and the things money can buy because they are unlucky. Either through a streak of luck or through the influence of some benign or wicked supernatural power, Paul discovers he can predict the winning horses in important upcoming horse races. With the gardener Bassett, who makes the bets, he accumulates a big sum of money. With his uncle's help, Paul manages to give his mother an anonymous gift of five thousand pounds, hoping this will satisfy her. It doesn't; the money only whets her appetite for more.

The voices in the house suddenly went mad, like a chorus of frogs on a spring evening. There were certain new furnishings, and Paul had a tutor. He was really going to Eton, his father's school, in the following autumn. There were flowers in the winter, and a blossoming of the luxury Paul's mother had been used to. And yet the voices in the house, behind the sprays of mimosa and almond-blossom, and from under the piles of iridescent cushions, simply trilled and screamed in a sort of ecstasy: "There must be more money! Oh-h-h; there must be more money. Oh, now, now-w! Now-w-w - there must be more money! - more than ever! More than ever!"

The voices are no longer whispering. They are trilling and screaming. This is the problem with money: there is never quite enough. Paul is now in a situation where he feels he must keep riding his rocking horse harder and harder in order to work himself into a state of consciousness in which he hears, or sees, the name of the winning horse in the next big race. His mother may sense what he is doing, but she seems, on one level, to be intentionally sacrificing her son for the money he can earn for her. The narrator explains early in the story that she does not really love her children.

Nevertheless, when her children were present, she always felt the centre of her heart go hard. This troubled her, and in her manner she was all the more gentle and anxious for her children, as if she loved them very much. Only she herself knew that at the centre of her heart was a hard little place that could not feel love, no, not for anybody. 

No matter how hard Paul rides his rocking horse, he can never reach the goal he really wants. He can never win his mother's love. He kills himself trying to do it. 

Does anyone have any good ideas for characters with strengths and weaknesses in To Kill a Mockingbird?

People usually do have strengths and weaknesses--except for Atticus. He seems to be the one man in the whole novel who is completely perfect. A few characters who could be analyzed for their strengths and weaknesses are Boo Radley, Jem Finch, and Tom Robinson. First, Boo Radley's weakness could be social anxiety. Sheriff Heck Tate says Boo is shy; that's why he doesn't come out of his house. This could be considered a weakness because Boo limits the joys of life to his own home, rather than experiencing the outside world. On the other hand, he is strong to stay in doors because he doesn't allow the gossip or myths about him in town influence how he wants to live his life. And when the children are in danger of their lives, it is Boo Radley who steps in like a hero and saves them. So, even though Boo Radley seems weak, he can show strength when he wants to and when his friends are in danger.

Next, there's Jem Finch. His strengths are that he is brave, confident, and can be kind. However, he has a temper that he takes out on his sister sometimes. For example, when he gets angry at Mrs. Dubose in chapter 11, he chops up the old lady's camellia bushes and roughs up Scout in the process. Scout describes the attack as follows:

"He did not begin to calm down until he had cut to tops off every camellia bush Mrs. Dubose owned . . . He bent my baton against his knee, snapped it in two and threw it down. By that time I was shrieking. Jem yanked my hair, said he didn't care, he'd do it again if he got a chance, and if I didn't shut up he'd pull every hair out of my head. I didn't shut up and he kicked me" (103).

Jem is a good big brother most of the time, for which he is strong; but, when he gets angry, he can be rude and rough with Scout.

Finally, Tom Robinson is strong because he stands up for himself in a white court of law. He knows that the odds are against him, but he shows up to court, bravely tells the truth, and doesn't lose his composure in the process. He could have just rolled over and admitted to doing what the Ewells' said he did, but he didn't. His weakness, however, is impatience. Rather than wait for Atticus to submit an appeal, he takes his chances by running from prison. As a result, he dies while attempting to climb over a prison fence.  

What personality traits would characterize Lady Teazle in The School for Scandal?

Lady Teazle is a young, flirtatious wife, hence the name "Tease-all" to convey how she relates to men, but she is good at heart. She is married to a wealthy older man, Sir Peter, an "old bachelor" who complains that his wife has a "teasing temper." He also says she is involved too much in the "extravagant fopperies" of high society. Much of this comes from the fact that she is a simple country girl who has been temporality taken in by the London high life. She means well but doesn't yet have good judgment about the extent to which London society might lead her astray. Her personality is one that on the surface looks more shallow than it really is underneath. This is important in a play about appearance versus reality, in which the people who seem the worst can turn out to be the best and vice versa.

The malevolent Lady Sneerwell will use Lady Teazle's frivolous and flirtatious reputation against her to spread gossip that she is having an affair with Charles Surface. But though tempted to have an affair with Charles' wicked brother, Joseph, Lady Teazle's essential goodness of character saves her. She is distressed at the way Lady Sneerwell tries to ruin her, and by the end rejects the "college" (or school) of scandal London society has tried to train her in, saying to Mrs. Sneerwell she is giving back her "diploma."

By the end of the play, Lady Teazle has decided to become a loyal wife. At core a good person, she was simply led towards temptation for a time from being dazzled by the new world of London society. Once she sees how false it is, she rejects it. She says at the end that though she "was late so volatile and gay" she will now "bend" her "cares" to her husband.

When does Juliet use irony in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet?

Irony comes in the three forms, verbal, situational and dramatic. In verbal irony, a word or phrase is used to suggest the opposite of what is meant. In Act III, Scene 5, Juliet has just spent her honeymoon night with Romeo. The two have been married secretly with only Friar Laurence and the Nurse aware of the situation. In this scene, Lady Capulet, who knows nothing about Romeo, informs Juliet that her father has agreed to marry her to Count Paris. Juliet is immediately distraught and argumentative over the situation and tells her mother that she doesn't wish to marry yet and that if she were to marry it would be to Romeo, a person she says she hates:

I will not marry yet, and when I do I swear
It shall be Romeo, whom you know I hate,
Rather than Paris.

She is, of course, being ironic in this statement because the reality is that she is deeply in love with Romeo and has already married him, but she cannot reveal this to her mother. In fact, Juliet is quite unable to come up with an argument which will dissuade her parents from arranging the marriage with Paris. Despite her pleas, her father remains steadfast and threatens to disown her if she doesn't marry the Count. Even the Nurse has no answers other than urging Juliet to forget Romeo and do as her father wishes.

What theme in A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry is recalled in reference to "marching roaches?" Why do you think Hansberry put that phrase...

Ruth is the character who refers to "marching roaches" at the end of Act II, Scene One. This is the point at which Mama announces that she has taken the insurance money and bought the family a house in Clybourne Park.

Ruth is ecstatic with the news:

Well -- well! -- All I can say is -- if this is my time in life -- MY TIME -- to say goodbye...to these Goddamned cracking walls!...and these marching roaches!...and this cramped little closet which ain't now or never was no kitchen!...then I say it loud and good, HALLELUJAH! AND GOODBYE MISERY...I DON'T EVER WANT TO SEE YOUR UGLY FACE AGAIN!

The "marching roaches" are a reference to the filth and crowding among which poor people in the projects live, just as the "cracking walls" are exemplary of neglect and eventual decay. 

Hansberry makes reference to these things to illustrate the circumstances in which the Younger family lives, compared to the circumstances of those in Clybourne Park. She lives in "misery," while those in their future neighborhood -- in which the Youngers are unwanted because they are black -- live the American Dream of home ownership. 

The attainment of the American Dream is one of the play's major themes. To live in poverty, amidst "marching roaches," is to be deprived of that dream.

Moreover, Ruth is a character who represses her emotions throughout much of the play. This is one of the ways in which she subordinates her own needs to care for others. This is the only scene in which she asserts her own need to live in a better home, in a space that is worthy of her and her future child. The buying of the house signals a newly found hope in this character.

What are the events leading up to Lady Macbeth dying of guilt?

At the beginning of the play, Lady Macbeth appears to be manipulative, stronger, and more dominant than her husband. Although Macbeth states that he would like to take the throne, he needs support and persuasion which he gets from Lady Macbeth. She appears to be bolder than her husband, urging him to follow through with his plan to kill king Duncan:

Art thou afeard
To be the same in thine own act and valour
As thou art in desire? Wouldst thou have that
Which thou esteem'st the ornament of life,
And live a coward in thine own esteem,
Letting 'I dare not' wait upon 'I would,'
Like the poor cat i' the adage?

Lady Macbeth's eloquence and passion reassured Macbeth that he should have no doubts, so after some hesitation, he commits the infamous deed and succeeds in taking the throne unlawfully.

Once Macbeth kills Duncan, he begins to turn inward, neglecting his wife and avoiding her consultation. He becomes obsessed with murdering anyone who could potentially rob him of his position as the king.

Lady Macbeth turns into an irrelevant figure and no longer possesses the strength she once had. As her husband begins to turn his back on her, Lady Macbeth becomes tormented by her own guilt for having encouraged her husband to get involved into evil acts (such as killing Duncan). In Act 5, her descent into madness is quite clear as we see her sleepwalking and hallucinating:

Out, damned spot! out, I say!--One: two: why,
then, 'tis time to do't...

who would have thought the old man
to have had so much blood in him.

She believes that she cannot wash bloodstains from her hands, which is the result of her guilt-ridden conscience. She pressured Macbeth to murder Duncan, and the past has come back to haunt her. Her tragic death is imminent. After her death, Macbeth realizes how futile life is:

It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

How many bones does a small child have?

A newborn baby is born with around three-hundred individual bones, but as they grow, many of these will fuse together. For example, newborn babies' skulls are not fully formed. A neonatal skull is composed of five plates of bone which will grow together to form the solid cranium in childhood. Similar fusion takes place in the elbows, ankles, and all throughout the body. Because anatomy is highly variable and any two children might have slightly different rates of skeletal maturation, it is difficult to say exactly how  many bones a small child has. 

Between the ages of two and three years, a child's bones will continue to ossify from soft cartilage into hard bone, and some of the bones will begin to fuse or close off. At this time, the number of bones in a child's body is still quite high--close to three-hundred. Between six and eighteen months of age, the skull has fused into one large piece of bone, so we can at least say that there are four less (unfused) bones in the body. The last stages of bone and growth plate fusion occur between the ages of sixteen and twenty-five, and at this time the number of bones is typically about two-hundred and six. My best guess, bearing in mind the high degree of variability from person to person, is that in the first five years of life, a child's body may have anywhere from 250 to 290 bones in it. 

How does Harper Lee present Atticus Finch and Bob Ewell as fathers?

In many ways, these two men are presented as opposites. Atticus is a genteel, dignified, educated man who treats everyone he meets with courtesy and respect. Even though his children view him as "feeble" early in the book, they begin to develop a deep respect for him as he courageously faces the challenges and dangers of defending Tom Robinson. He comes across as a somewhat indulgent father--not many kids in 1930s Alabama would have called their dad by his first name--but he is full of wisdom, constantly attempting to instill his young children with tolerance and respect for their fellow human beings. If the story of To Kill a Mockingbird is told through the eyes of young Scout, she herself tries to make sense of the events surrounding her by appealing to the wisdom of Atticus. He is a thoroughly sympathetic figure in To Kill a Mockingbird.

Bob Ewell, on the other hand, is portrayed as a ne'er-do-well, living off of relief checks while largely neglecting his children. Mayella, Tom's alleged teenage victim, is essentially responsible for taking care of her younger siblings while Bob drinks. They live in a hovel next to the town dump, and the children survive off of the refuse they can find there. Yet Bob is also a virulent racist, freely stating his perceived superiority to the town's black community, which he ludicrously alleges in the trial is driving down his property values. It is clear that it is Bob who is guilty of punching Mayella in the eye, but the two testify that Tom actually committed the crime during his alleged rape of Mayella. Bob is consistently course and disrespectful throughout his testimony, and Scout has the utmost contempt for him, even as she seems to feel somewhat sorry for Mayella. So in short, Atticus is a good, if imperfect father while Bob is a terrible father, not even worthy of being described as a father at all.

What three events took place as the story Tuck Everlasting began? What connected them?

Event number one is Mae Tuck beginning her travels to the small town of Treegap.  She only makes the trip once every ten years, and she makes the trip in order to meet her two sons, Miles and Jesse.  

Event number two is Winnie Foster losing her patience and deciding to think about running away.  

Event number three is a strange man arriving at the Foster's front yard.  He claims to be looking for somebody, and he won't elaborate.  

All three of those seemingly disconnected events are indeed connected.  The stranger turns out to be the man in the yellow suit, and he is looking for the Tuck family.  He suspects that they are immortal, and he wants to find out their secret.  The day after meeting the man in the yellow suit is the day that Winnie decides to give running away a small test run.  She goes in the forest, and she meets Jesse Tuck.  Mae Tuck arrives shortly after with Miles, and the three Tucks "kidnap" Winnie.  As the Tucks try to spirit themselves away, they pass the man in the yellow suit.  

I suppose if I had to pick a physical item or person from the story that connects all three events, I would pick the entire Tuck family.  The stranger wants to find this mysterious family, Winnie accidentally discovers the family, and the stranger follows Winnie and the escaping Tucks in order to learn their secret.  

What are five quotes that blame/acknowledge fate (or a synonym) in Act V of Romeo and Juliet?

Fate is an important theme throughout the play, as acknowledged in the Prologue. In Act V, fate claims the lives of Count Paris, Romeo, Juliet and Lady Montague.

Act V, Scene 1, Line 25:

Romeo:

Is it e’en so?—Then I defy you, stars!—

Romeo intends to rebel against a fate ("stars") which he believes has taken Juliet away from him. He has already decided to join her in death.

Act V, Scene 2, Lines 17-20:

Friar Laurence:

Unhappy fortune! By my brotherhood,
The letter was not nice but full of charge,
Of dear import, and the neglecting it
May do much danger.

The Friar is acknowledging the role of "fortune" (fate) in the fact that Friar John, who was delayed by a plague threat, could not reach Romeo with the Friar's letter explaining his plan to have Juliet fake her death.

Act V, Scene 3, Lines 81-83

Romeo:

O, give me thy hand,
One writ with me in sour misfortune’s book!
I’ll bury thee in a triumphant grave.

Romeo laments that luck or fortune has been equally "sour" for both him and Count Paris, who happened to be at the tomb when Romeo arrived. Paris believed Romeo was vandalizing the tomb. They fought and Romeo killed the Count.

Act V, Scene 3, Lines 109-112:

Romeo:

O, here
Will I set up my everlasting rest
And shake the yoke of inauspicious stars
From this world-wearied flesh!

Romeo is about to take the poison, hoping that death will once and for all end the string of bad luck or fate (inauspicious stars) which has plagued him.

Act V, Scene 3, Lines 302-305:

Prince:

See what a scourge is laid upon your hate,
That heaven finds means to kill your joys with love,
And I, for winking at your discords too,
Have lost a brace of kinsmen. All are punished.

The Prince acknowledges that fate ("heaven") has punished the Montagues and Capulets for their bitter hatred. The Prince too has been punished by having his "kinsmen" Mercutio and Paris killed.

How does Wole Soyinka's present women in the play The Lion and the Jewel?

Wole Soyinka presents women as unintelligent individuals who are admired for their physical beauty and seek independence throughout the play The Lion and the Jewel. Women are also depicted as possessions, which is evident in the payment of the bride-price. Sidi is portrayed as a beautiful girl who becomes conceited after her image is published in a popular magazine. Sidi's confident attitude changes her perspective on life, and she wishes to be revered throughout her village. She foolishly attempts to mock Baroka, but is wooed into sleeping with the Bale after he shows her a machine that produces stamps. Sadiku is also portrayed as foolish because she believes Baroka and spreads the false rumor that he is impotent. Baroka uses Sadiku as a pawn in his plan to marry Sidi. Sadiku also celebrates and recounts how she "scotched" Okiki, Baroka's father. Both Sidi and Sadiku are portrayed as unintelligent females who are at the mercy of men and viewed as possessions throughout the play.