My friend had concluded that it he took his language and culture out of his poetry, he stood a beiter chance of
receiving a fellowship. He took out his native language, the poetic patois of our reality, the rich mixture of Spanish,
English, pachuco and street talk which we know so well. In other words, he took the tortillas out of his poetry,
which is to say he took the soul out of his poetry.
At a neighborhood fair in Texas, somewhere between the German Oom-pah Sausage Stand and the Mexican
Gorditas booth, I overheard a young man say to his friend, "I wish I had a heritage. Sometimes I feel so lonely for
one." And the tall American trees were dangling their thick branches right down over his head.
Which best states how the structure of each excerpt supports a different tone?
Anaya structures his text as an anecdote, which gives it a humorous tone, while Nye structures her text as a
counterclaim, which gives it a defensive tone.
Anaya structures his text as an explanation, which gives it an authoritative tone, while Nye structures her text as an
impression, which gives it a soothing tone.
Anaya structures his text as a theory, which gives it an academic tone, while Nye structures her text as a list, which
gives it an unemotional tone.
Anaya structures his text as a news report, which gives it a neutral tone, while Nye structures her text as a critique,
which aives it a judamental tone.

give it into a zoo or the wilde

explanation:

a-he encouraged islamic schools to introduce greek texts.

d-he invited greek scholars to teach their texts to the locals.

explanation:

the transmission of the greek classics to latin western europe during the middle ages was a key factor in the development of intellectual life in western europe.[1] interest in greek texts and their availability was scarce in the latin west during the earlier middle ages, but as traffic to the east increased so did western scholarship.

mark brainliest and have a great day!

explanation:

the intellectual community is a place like a university where people with high marks, or original thought or an outstanding interest in something gather. they take classes together. they discuss things. they argue sometimes, and not always in a friendly way. but if they argue, it is because they are passionate about something, and there is nothing the matter with that.

lately i've been hearing rumors that it is not the way it was when i went to school. the one thing all schools used to have was free speech. the 1st amendment rights were sacred. now i'm hearing they are not. students can be reported and disciplined for giving an off the wall opinion.

that is shameful.

intellectual ideas are meant to be discussed. they are meant to be chewed up and worked on. that is the primary responsibility of every intellectual community. if that is not the way it is, then that is not a school to go to.

social media, in my opinion, and this is just an opinion. i wouldn't take it too seriously, complicates everything to do with human communication. you can want to share things and others feel they have the right to be very critical or sarcastic or mean about what you share. lack of respect is an immeasurable intolerable condition and social media abounds with that sort of thing.

one of the things i really like about is how careful people are because they must have some idea that the mods are exactly what the word says they are. they police this board very well, and what is so remarkable about them is that they are no older than the average grade 12 student.

my hat goes off to them (which means i respect them quite a bit).