Describe why dickinson might have used an arc structure for "because i could not stop for death."

 I understand the caesurae (plural for caesura) as decelerating down its pace, which makes intellect seeing the speaker's privilege that, when Death came to accumulate her, "He knew no haste."  First, they initiative near the school to watch the children play, then to the fields to lookout the sun set over the scrap.  She describes the way night seems to fall after the sun has passed them, and how she grows chilly.  Finally, Death's carriage reaches at the speaker's grave "in the Ground," and she designates how corporeal time is moving so swiftly while time for her moves so slowly because she is measuring it against "Infinity."  Therefore, Dickinson's use of caesurae really slows the pace because the reader must pause so often, at least every time she employs an end dash, and this is appropriate to the content of the text.

Dickinson's "Because I could not stop for Death" is structured as arc because throughout the course of the poem, Dickinson takes the reader on her journey. At the beginning she discusses how she sees the school children, which represents her youth. Then, she writes about the "fields grazing grain," which represents her adulthood. Finally, she talks about the setting sun and her at her old age. Each of these are leading to death when she is being brought to the grave. This allows for the reader to understand that death comes to everyone and ends our mortality.

Explanation:

where exactly is the sentence

formal arguments

in written, formal arguments, the best way to build credibility with readers is to provide them with evidence. no matter what your argument might be and which side you agree with, citing strong evidence to back up your claim leaves the opposition with little to argue.

emotional appeal is often used in oral arguments. written arguments, however, rely on four main types of evidence. as you read further, you will see that some types are more credible than others and "hold more water" so to speak.

statistical evidence

the strongest type of evidence in formal writing is statistical evidence. this ranges from true, hard data presented as a percentage or number, to survey-type data. for example, statistical evidence could be:

4 out of 5 experts claim

85% of women in the united

7 members were present

statistical evidence can be proven as fact. you can actually go out and find hard information to prove your particular claim.

testimonial evidence

the use of celebrities as credibility evidence can be considered testimonial in nature. many people look up to celebrities as role models in their lives. good or bad, when a person chooses a life-path that takes them into public light, there will be many others out there who want to emulate the celebrity. these celebrity endorsements provide the second-strongest type of evidence found in formal arguments.

testimonial evidence can also be collected from experts and authorities in a given field. doctors, dentists, lawyers often provide expert testimonials. their authority is not often questions. they are expected to "know their stuff."

anecdotal evidence

when storytelling is involved as evidence, anecdotal evidence is being used. due to its less objective nature, anecdotal evidence is not extremely strong. when coupled with statistical or testimonial evidence, anecdotal evidence can be highly effective in determining credibility or proof.

storytelling, although based on fact, can include quite a bit of opinion, thus making it less objective. usually, eyewitnesses are used as providers of anecdotal evidence. they saw or experienced the phenomenon at hand are telling their version or side of the story.

analogical evidence

when information is scarce about something and little is known, analogical evidence is often used in a formal argument to increase credibility of the proof. if the phenomenon in question is new and little is known about it, analogical evidence that pulls in known factors about a similar phenomenon to show parallels can be an effective way to provide proof.

due to limited knowledge about the phenomenon, in this situation, analogical evidence can be regarded as the weakest type of evidence used in formal arguments. one can only imagine and hope that the comparison-phenomenon is close enough that the results can be applied to the new phenomenon.

in the

all that really matters in a formal argument is whether or not the writer has credible evidence to back up what they want to say or what they are thinking. so often, we hear people say, "prove it! " to one another.

one last little formal arguments not only provide credible evidence to support claims, don't forget that acknowledgment of the opposing point of view in an argument also strengthens the entire product.