Niccolo machiavelli ” the morals of a prince” answer questions #1 and


ENGLISH 1301  Read incident from The Norton Reader, I achieve cater the incident in pdf format.  Answer investigations #1 and #3 fixed on guidelines included.

 

READING AND RESPONSE GUIDELINES
When a balbutiation is assigned and discussions/questions are to be answered, the
following counsel achieve benefit the tyro in twain balbutiation and responding to the
balbutiation and it’s investigations


READING
-Read the assigned interest twice. The earliest balbutiation should be singly for renewal.
Assume this is not an assigned balbutiation, but one you entertain been purport to read…The
second term environing is when commentary (note-taking, highlighting, writing in the margins,
etc…should befall.)
-Reading the investigations early achieve grasp detached the renewal of the interest.
This may despatch decision the answers to the assigned investigations, but these
answers may closing identical insight-which is most leading in discussions.


RESPONDING
-Create a two-part reply at the minimum. First, divide PERSONAL
THOUGHTS encircling the investigation(s) asked. Second, add TEXTUAL EVIDENCE
to assistance these thoughts. (These may be trodden cites, references to individualitys,
page aggregate, etc…) Keep in sentiment that when using trodden cites, “quotation marks”
need to be used behind a while the thread and/or page calculate behind each cite.
Example 1: On page 262, the perpetrator states, “She was an ungovernable maid that didn’t perceive
any reform.”
Example 2: “She was an ungovernable maid that didn’t perceive any reform.” (p.262)
Example 3: When quoting poetry, thread and page calculate are twain used. “The road
followed was an disturbed one, as the gulls passed past.” (p.262, threads 27-28)


FORMAT FOR THE RESPONSE
Once these two aspects are finished, put them simultaneously in a brawny, ropy “essaystyled” reply, guardianship the assigned investigations disunited and calculateed. Do not singly
submit a tractate behind a while “identical thoughts” in one individuality and “textual evidence” in another.
They should be interwoven behind a whilein the reply as one. There is no order article to these
responses. They are graded on temper, not part.
*Keep in sentiment that there rarely are just or evil-doing answers in these
responses. What is most leading are the identical thoughts and what the
reader thinks encircling the interest.*