Which statements use rhetorical devices? Select two options.

Read the excerpt from a supporting opinion of the supreme court’s ruling in plessy v. ferguson, 1896. laws permitting, and even requiring, their separation in places where they are liable to be brought into contact do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race to the other, and have been generally, if not universally, recognized as within the competency of the state legislatures in the exercise of their police power. how does this relate to the premises of brown v. board of education? the brown case addresses whether state legislatures are equipped to judge the quality of education offered at segregated schools. the brown case addresses whether authorities believe that one race is inferior to another when creating public schools. the brown case addresses whether these laws inherently deny certain citizens equal protection under the law. the brown case addresses the legality of using police power to monitor public places separated by race.

Now pick a section from chapter 1 of the call of the wild in which buck is interacting with another character. imagine that section narrated in first person point of view from one of the character's perspective, and rewrite it in the space below, attempting to use a similar writing style as the original author. then, in a second paragraph, consider this: are you able to explore some of the same ideas and themes when viewing the situation from the character's first person point of view, as compared to when it is narrated from london's third-person limited point of view? explain. your response should be be about 150 words in total.

Read the excerpt from act 1 of a doll's house. helmer: nora! [goes up to her and takes her playfully by the ear.] the same little featherhead! suppose, now, that i borrowed fifty pounds today, and you spent it all in the christmas week, and then on new year's eve a slate fell on my head and killed me, and— nora: [putting her hands over his mouth]. oh! don't say such horrid things. helmer: still, suppose that happened, —what then? nora: if that were to happen, i don't suppose i should care whether i owed money or not. helmer: yes, but what about the people who had lent it? nora: they? who would bother about them? i should not know who they were. helmer: that is like a woman! but seriously, nora, you know what i think about that. no debt, no borrowing. there can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. we two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle. nora: [moving towards the stove]. as you , torvald. how does the interaction between helmer and nora advance the plot? nora realizes that helmer will completely disapprove of her having borrowed money, so she has to continue to keep it a secret from him. nora realizes that she and helmer have the same ideas about financial issues, and the conversation brings them closer together later in the play. helmer realizes that nora is more responsible with money than he originally thought, and he trusts her more with finances later in the play. nora realizes that helmer knows a lot more about borrowing and lending, and she will seek his input later when she needs it.