Ask your own question, for FREE!
English 21 Online
OpenStudy (anonymous):

Will put the question in comments....medal, fan and testimonial

OpenStudy (anonymous):

THE MATCH There never was a time when the world was without fire, but there was a time when men did not know how to kindle fire; and after they learned how to kindle one, it was a long, long time before they learned how to kindle one easily. In these days we can kindle a fire without any trouble, because we can easily get a match; but we must remember that the match is one of the most wonderful things in the world, and that it took men thousands of years to learn how to make one. Let us learn the history of this familiar little object, the match. Fire was first given to man by nature itself. When a forest is set on fire by cinders from a neighboring volcano, or when a tree is set ablaze by a thunderbolt, we may say that nature strikes a match. In the early history of the world, nature had to kindle all the fires, for man by his own effort was unable to produce a spark. The first method, then, of getting fire for use was to light sticks of wood at a flame kindled by nature—by a volcano, perhaps, or by a stroke of lightning. These firebrands were carried to the home and used in kindling the fires there. The fire secured in this way was carefully guarded and was kept burning as long as possible. But the flame, however faithfully watched, would sometimes be extinguished. A sudden gust of wind or a sudden shower would put it out. Then a new firebrand would have to be secured, and this often meant a long journey and a deal of trouble. In 1827, John Walker, a druggist in a small English town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and it burst into flame. The druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. It is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing certain chemicals together and rubbing them. Although Walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. It could be lighted only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. In a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change worked wonders. The match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. It would ignite when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. This was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar. What was the main problem with relying on nature to start a flame? Fire could only be collected with "sticks of wood" that were hard to find. Fire had to be "carefully guarded," requiring someone to stay behind from hunting. Fire had to be "carried to the home," which could be dangerous and awkward. Fire was likely hard to find, requiring a "long journey and a deal of trouble."

OpenStudy (anonymous):

@Blonde_Gangsta @Lady.Liv1776 @JackofallTradez @hailyokay @sleepyjess

OpenStudy (anonymous):

@itsbribro @winsteria @peterg2001 @linn99123 @NormaValenzuela

OpenStudy (anonymous):

@JackofallTradez , please help me

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Do you have any ideas?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

B?

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Actually, I thought it was D, because the main problem was getting fire, seeing as how they couldn't make fire

OpenStudy (anonymous):

thank you..do you mind helping me with the same story?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

It about main idea

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Sure ^_^

OpenStudy (anonymous):

What is the main idea of the second paragraph? Flames started by nature were easily put out. Flames were not always carefully guarded. Getting fire from nature was challenging. Lightning and volcanos started human fires.

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Do you have any ideas?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I got B but I have trouble sometimes

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

I thought it was C, because the main idea is about all the difficulties, not just guarding the fire

OpenStudy (anonymous):

What is the main idea of the first paragraph? It took humans a long time to develop the match. Learning how to make fire was a long struggle for humans. <--- my answer The world went for years without adequate fire. We often forget how the match changed the world.

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

I agree with you that it's B on this one ^_^

OpenStudy (anonymous):

one more?

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Sure

OpenStudy (anonymous):

There never was a time when the world was without fire, but there was a time when men did not know how to kindle fire; and after they learned how to kindle one, it was a long, long time before they learned how to kindle one easily. In these days we can kindle a fire without any trouble, because we can easily get a match; but we must remember that the match is one of the most wonderful things in the world, and that it took men thousands of years to learn how to make one. Let us learn the history of this familiar little object, the match. Fire was first given to man by nature itself. When a forest is set on fire by cinders from a neighboring volcano, or when a tree is set ablaze by a thunderbolt, we may say that nature strikes a match. In the early history of the world, nature had to kindle all the fires, for man by his own effort was unable to produce a spark. The first method, then, of getting fire for use was to light sticks of wood at a flame kindled by nature—by a volcano, perhaps, or by a stroke of lightning. These firebrands were carried to the home and used in kindling the fires there. The fire secured in this way was carefully guarded and was kept burning as long as possible. But the flame, however faithfully watched, would sometimes be extinguished. A sudden gust of wind or a sudden shower would put it out. Then a new firebrand would have to be secured, and this often meant a long journey and a deal of trouble. In 1827, John Walker, a druggist in a small English town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and it burst into flame. The druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. It is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing certain chemicals together and rubbing them. Although Walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. It could be lighted only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. In a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change worked wonders. The match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. It would ignite when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. This was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar. What information do we get from the bolded paragraph that develops the main idea of the essay? How nature started the first fires How humans came up with the idea for matches The need for a new way to create fire I got B, this bolded paragraph is the second paragraph The way matches are made

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I got D sorry

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Which one is the bolded paragraph?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

the second paragraph

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Actually, I got C, because they don't mention an idea for the match

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Thank you soo much..I can make a new question to give you another medal if you want...

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Nah, that's OK Helping you is reward enough on it's own ^_^

OpenStudy (anonymous):

aww...thank you for all of your help

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Ill tell you how I did

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

KK

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Ok, so I ended up with a 70%...the first one you got was right

OpenStudy (anonymous):

2nd one was right also

OpenStudy (anonymous):

3rd was wrong

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

Sorry

OpenStudy (anonymous):

4th right

OpenStudy (anonymous):

no need to apologize, I got the main of it wrong by myself

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Have a great day and thank you

OpenStudy (jackofalltradez):

It's ironic, the third question I agreed with you XD And you have a great day, as well ^_^

Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!
Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!