What conclusion can you draw by connecting Hillquit’s quotation, with your knowledge of that the time?

postive, comparative, superlative - good, better, best

recall how we defined nouns as words capable of having plurals and possessive endings. adjectives (and their first cousin, the adverb) also have a feature that distinguishes them. they come in three states. first, the raw adjective—in its positive state—merely describes the noun modified; it doesn’t care about how this particular person or thing stacks up against other members of the same noun class

you didn't provide the passage.

explanation:

seeing as this is your first question on i can see why you may have not known that you need to provide the passage.

without the passage, or even the name of the passage, we can not read the passage, therefore we can not determine when or how the pacing effects the tone.

however, you can either repost this question (providing the passage this time)

or you can comment below what the passage is, and i'll you to the best of my ability!

no se

explanation:

no se

to eliminate ambiguous remote or broad reference it is necessary to focus on anaphoric reference. by definition "anaphoric reference means that a word in a text refers back to other ideas in the text for its meaning." the references should be clear and leave no room for ambiguity.

in the first case the pronoun it probably refers to the car but it has not been mentioned before so we should replace it for the car. in doing so the statement becomes clear.

in sentence number   two   the pronoun he refers to charles dickens the author. yet, the first half of the sentence is about the book a tale of two cities. to repair this it would be better to rephrase the first half : after i read   a tale of two cities by dickens, he so as to remove the remote reference.