Identify the sentence that has faulty parallel a) chelsea was sure that she wanted levi to join them and that he would be good at spelunking. b) regent argued that the bond levy would increase taxes and the senators needed to find another way to fund the project.

The sentence that has faulty parallel structure is option B

Regent argued that the bond levy would increase taxes and the senators needed to find another way to fund the project

Faulty parallelism is a construction in which two or more parts of a sentence are equivalent in meaning but not grammatically similar in form. It does not follow the same grammatical pattern concerning verb tenses

1. read the following excerpt from franklin d. roosevelt's "fireside chat 19":

on the other side of the picture, we must learn also to know that guerilla warfare against the germans in, let us say serbia or norway, us; that a successful russian offensive against the germans us; and that british successes on land or sea in any part of the world strengthen our hands.

remember always that germany and italy, regardless of any formal declaration of war, consider themselves at war with the united states at this moment just as much as they consider themselves at war with britain or russia. and germany puts all the other republics of the americas into the same category of enemies. the people of our sister republics of this hemisphere can be honored by that fact.  

the true goal we seek is far above and beyond the ugly field of battle. when we resort to force, as now we must, we are determined that this force shall be directed toward ultimate good as well as against immediate evil. we americans are not destroyers — we are builders.

analyze the effectiveness of this excerpt. how does it function within the speech as a whole? how does the structure of the excerpt to convey the speech's purpose and key points? support your argument with evidence from the speech. (10 points)

answer: the first one

explanation:

explicitly is defined as “in a clear and detailed manner, leaving no room for confusion or doubt.” the rest are interpretive and not clearly proven leaving in fact possible “confusion or doubt” which explicitly, by definition cannot have.