In this conversation, which discussion technique does anna most clearly show? daniel: this is all well and good, but we're assuming plato is giving us the real facts about socrates. here, chambers writes, "it's possible socrates refused to back down because he wanted to do the right thing. it's equally possible his ego took over his tongue, in which case he could be considered conceited and righteous. yetplato leads us down the path to piety." so if im reading this right, socrates might not be the amazing guy plato makes him out to be. jennifer: but even if it was his ego that got in the way, didn't he still make a sacrifice? he could have begged the jury to let him go. anna: but plato didn't write anything about socrates's ego, right? daniel: i'm not sure. didn't read plato's account, just chambers's article. a. identifying missing information. b. synthesizing claims. c. confirming the question. d. establishing roles

The discussion technique that Anna most clearly show is (A) identifying missing information. In the conversation, this is shown when Anna asks whether Plato wrote anything about Socrates's ego. By making these questions, she is identifying missing information because that is made to obtain the information requested.

in what passage i'm sorry but i don't see anything there.

awnser: the oxford dictionary of quotations (oup 1970) has 66 pages of quotations

attributed to the writings of william shakespeare in which there are 2369 quotations,

which may reflect well over 5000 speeches, discussions, observations and comments

that are present in shakespeare’s work. it is largely from those speeches and discussions

on shakespeare’s 37 plays, as well as his, and others’ poems, that examples have been

taken here.

in this book all quotations from his poems and plays have been taken from various

editions of the arden shakespeare.

the writer is very much indebted to the rapid response provided by his son, henry

audley-charles , for cries of , guidance, advice and repairs to his ageing pc, that

henry provided at all hours. without this assistance over the last 3 years this book

could not have been written.

in addition, the writer is much for the kind by discussion and proof readings from

elizabeth macbeth and janet hulse; and for his knowledge of shakespeare’s plays and

poems in discussions with monsieur francis saillart; and especially for years of proof

reading, support and with this book from my wife brenda amy cordeiro. above

all, the debt i owe is to professor david price, vice provost research. he has acted as

the editor and the guide for the whole project. this has been far from easy with

changes repeatedly being made by the author and which continued after professor price

had provided all the editorial structure for this project.