contestada

Alana wanted to speak about climate conditions that might favor tornado formation in the United States. For testimony she used a document by researchers Schaefer and Marzban on the NOAA website, and she said, "Schaefer and Tatom (1998) looked at the mean Sea Surface Temperature (SST) in the strip 5 deg. N to 5 deg. S and 180 deg. W to 150 deg. W and wrote, 'A Kruskal-Wallis H test was then used to see if any difference in different tornado measures exists between El Niño, La Niña and neutral years. Also the entire contiguous U.S. and three sub-areas were considered. All six of these combinations failed to have significance at the 99 percent level. One could not state with confidence that El Niño/La Niña had any effect on tornado or strong tornado activity.'" Why should she have paraphrased instead of using a direct quotation?

Respuesta :

holesstanham

In this example, Alana is giving a speech about climate conditions, and she wants to talk about certain information that she found during her research. However, the way in which Alana is presenting this information is not the right way to present information during a speech. Alana is using a direct quotation that includes many specific details. These are likely to be difficult to follow, particularly for people who are not experts. Therefore, the best thing Alana could have done was to paraphrase this information and present it in a way that was more relatable and easier to follow.
Look I can’t read anything so plz the best that you camera it ok

Otras preguntas