Early American writers were mostly men is an independent clause. Correct option is a.
An independent clause is a group of words that can standalone as a complete sentence and express a complete thought. In this case, option a is an independent clause because it forms a complete sentence with a subject ("Early American writers") and a predicate ("were mostlymen"). Option b, on the other hand, is a dependent clause because it starts with the subordinating conjunction "Although," which makes it reliant on an independent clause to form a complete sentence.
To know more about independent clause:
#SPJ6
Complete question is:
Which of the following is an independent clause?
a. Early American writers were mostly men.
b. Although early American writers were mostly men.
A.to show that all men are mortal and therefore Ivan Ilyich, a man, must die
B.to show that Ivan Ilyich finally acknowledges that he is dying
C.to show that Ivan Ilyich’s attitude toward life has not prepared him to face death
D.to show that Ivan Ilyich has had a good education and therefore his thoughts are sophisticated
The syllogism is used (A) to show that all men are mortal and therefore Ivan Ilyich, a man, must die.
This is a logical argument in which Ivan believes that Caius is a man and that all men are mortal, then Caius too must be a mortal.
Answer: omniscient narration is wrong.
Explanation: I just took the test and got it wrong. My best guess is dialogue
Answer:
No, it is not possible to sympathize with Raju or be content with the ending of the story for it presents no change of heart in the criminal even after he was convicted and jailed for some months.
Explanation:
R. K. Narayan's short story "Trail of the Green Blazer" revolves around the story of a pickpocket named Raju and his intention to correct his wrong ways. But in his attempt to make things right, (even if it's just to return a balloon for the motherless child), he ended up being caught and convicted, leading to his imprisonment for 18 months.
Considering the ending of the story, it is not fair to say that it is the right way for the plot to end. There is always retribution for any wrongful act committed and if Raju hadn't decided to return the purse with the balloon to the Green Blazer, there is no knowing he may change his ways and stop stealing. With his act caught and him convicted and imprisoned, the event can change him for the better. But that did not even seem to change him. The story ends with him deciding that "If ever I pick up something again, I shall make sure I don’t have to put it back". This shows that he's still thinking of continuing his ways and making sure that he did not return anything, not even if it involves a "motherless child". So, it is hard to sympathize with him for there is no change of heart even after being imprisoned.