Curtis sat in the third row with his mother and father. They were quiet and reverential as the concert began. Occasionally, Curtis bowed his head as if in thought. When they stood at intermission, he took his mother’s arm and held her hand. Which statement describes the narrative voice of this paragraph?

The paragraph has a first-person narrator offering thoughts and feelings.

The paragraph has a second-person narrator addressing the reader.

The paragraph has a third-person narrator sharing observations.

The paragraph has an omniscient narrator with knowledge of the future.

i need answeres FAST! plz :-)

C. The paragraph has a third-person narrator sharing observations

Explanation:

A first–person excerpt would contain the words "I," "me," "my," etc., since the story would be told from the perspective of who it's happening to. Since the story is consistently describing someone else, this isn't the answer.  

A second–person story would be like a letter. It would refer to both "you and I," or "we." The story is told from a first–person perspective that is written to only be shared with one other person as if they are talking to them directly. Again, since none of these pronouns are used, this isn't the answer.  

A third–person story is one that describes someone else's story. No first– or second– person pronouns will be used and the narrator is completely disconnected from the story's events. This is likely the answer since this is the method of how the excerpt is told.  

A story with an omniscient narrator will likely also be a third–person story, except the narrator is aware of all of the thoughts of the characters. In this excerpt, it's obvious that the narrator doesn't know Curtis' thoughts, as he assumes that he bows his head occasionally in deep thought rather than confirming it as completely true. So, this isn't you answer.  

the articles of confederation only set up the continental congress at the federal level. there were no executive or judicial branches except within the states. the states were allowed to keep every right that was not specifically given to congress. the bonding of the states was through a 'firm league of friendship' that best served as a defense agreement against invasion. states were not allowed to use taxes as a way to discourage treaties, and states were extremely limited in their dealings with foreign nations.

not many historians today talk about the strengths of the articles of confederation, likely because of how unpopular the document quickly became. the articles did set the legislative body, congress, as the highest power in the nation because of the fear of monarchy. congress had the sole power to declare war, assign treaties, entertain foreign relations, and operate post offices. disputes between states and territorial issues were to be brought to congress. the document also stipulated that canada was allowed to enter the union if they desired.

there were more weaknesses than strengths under the articles of confederation. the lack of power given to the continental congress strangled the federal government. the articles gave congress the power to pass laws but no power to enforce those laws. if a state did not support a federal law, that state could simply ignore it. congress had no power to levy taxes or regulate trade. without a federal court system or executive leader, there would be no way to enforce these laws, either. amending the articles of confederation would also require a unanimous decision, which would be extremely difficult.

people can eat food during that time