why does the speaker in this excerpt from langston hughes's "i, too" wish to eat at the table? tomorrow,
i'll be at the table
when company comes.
nobody'll dare
say to me,
"eat in the kitchen,"
then.1.the speaker hopes to sit at the table and interact with those he serves from the kitchen.
2. the speaker resents being sent to the kitchen and wants an equal seat at the table with other people.
3. the speaker hopes to rise above those now at the table and force them to eat in the kitchen later.
4. the speaker is uncomfortable while eating alone in the small kitchen.
5. the speaker is proud to be in the kitchen because he is serving the guests at the table.

to eliminate ambiguous remote or broad reference it is necessary to focus on anaphoric reference. by definition "anaphoric reference means that a word in a text refers back to other ideas in the text for its meaning." the references should be clear and leave no room for ambiguity.

in the first case the pronoun it probably refers to the car but it has not been mentioned before so we should replace it for the car. in doing so the statement becomes clear.

in sentence number   two   the pronoun he refers to charles dickens the author. yet, the first half of the sentence is about the book a tale of two cities. to repair this it would be better to rephrase the first half : after i read   a tale of two cities by dickens, he so as to remove the remote reference.

the correct answer is option d. none of these. it is noted that options a, b, and c share the same content.

despite the valid answer provided at the last sentence of each of the options, a question/answer format shouldn't include humourous themed responses such as "you bet your thermal pj's we do." - unless of course, the answer is carried out in an informal environment. this could be replaced with a simple "yes" or "it is necessary".

the question should be re-phrased to a more appropiate syntaxis. instead of "do we need the greenhouse effect? ", it should be written as "is the greenhouse effect necessary? " in order to give it a general scope, instead of limiting the answer to the needs of "we" the humans.