Change the following sentence into negative. 1.He has a science fiction.
2.Peter has a dog at home.
3.Either Krishna or Mina will win the match.
4.There are a lot of animals in the zoo.
5. Lucky doesn't Elizabeth answers it.
6. He used to sing
7. Drive quickly.
8. He told a story and so did his mother.
9. She has a lot of rice.

Read these sentences from thr excerpt. what the most dreaded, that i most desired. what he most loved, i most hated. that which to him was a great evil, to be carefully shunned, was to me a great good, to be diligently sought; and the argument which he so warmly urged, against my learning to read, only served to inspire me with a desire and determination to learn. which statement best explains why the author uses parallel structure to advance his purpose?

Read these paragraphs from the story. i told him my address. it would take an hour’s quick walk to get back home. “it’s like this,” he said. “we’ll look at the matter straight. if you go back home tonight, you take your chance of accidents. a cart may run over you, and there’s always banana skins and orange peel, to say nothing of fallen ladders.” he spoke of the improbable with an intense seriousness that would have been laughable six hours before. but i did not laugh. what does this interaction between the two men reveal about james? james is skeptical and thinks mr. atkinson is overreacting to the situation. james is dismayed by the things mr. atkinson says and begins to feel uncomfortable. james is surprised by mr. atkinson's solemnness and thinks there is value in what the man is saying. james is appreciative of mr. atkinson's concern and wonders if he should hurry home. the correct answer is; "james is surprised by mr. atkinson's solemnness and thinks there is value in what the man is saying." i am not putting this up so someone can answer but so when people search this they will know the correct the correct answer is not; "james is skeptical and thinks mr. atkinson is overreacting to the situation." everyone said that was the right answer but its your

Read the passage. excerpt from "why equal pay is worth fighting for" by senator elizabeth warren, april 17, 2014 i honestly can't believe that we're still arguing over equal pay in 2014. when i started teaching elementary school after college, the public school district didn't hide the fact that it had two pay scales: one for men and one for women. women have made incredible strides since then. but 40 years later, we're still debating equal pay for equal work. women today still earn only 77 cents for every dollar a man earns, and they're taking a hit in nearly every occupation. bloomberg analyzed census data and found that median earnings for women were lower than those for men in 264 of 265 major occupation categories. in 99.6 percent of occupations, men get paid more than women. that's not an accident; that's discrimination. the effects of this discrimination are real, and they are long lasting. today, more young women go to college than men, but unequal pay makes it harder for them to pay back student loans. pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women. . for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by, and many families depend as much on mom's salary as they do on dad's, if not more. women are the main breadwinners, or joint breadwinners, in two-thirds of the families across the country, and pay discrimination makes it that much harder for these families to stay afloat. women are ready to fight back against pay discrimination, but it's not easy. today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes. here in the senate, sen. barbara mikulski (d-md.) introduced the paycheck fairness act to give women the tools to combat wage discrimination. it would ensure that salary differences have something to do with the actual job that they are doing, and not just because they are women. senator warren states that the effects of pay discrimination are long-lasting. is this a valid argument supported by accurate evidence? no; warren weakens her point by claiming that the paycheck fairness act would "give women the tools to combat wage discrimination." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women." no; warren weakens her point by noting, "today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes."