What do some critics see as a notable difference between the audio and text of Churchill's speech?

A. Churchill varies his speaking rate and volume to create emphasis in the audio version, but the sentence in the text version are lengthy and lack variety.

B. The tone in the text seems sad and defeatist, but in the audio version, Churchill speaks with determination

C. Churchill uses sarcasm in the audio version, but sarcasm cannot be identified in the text version

D. The tone in the text seems inspirational, but in the audio version, Churchill sounds unemotional

Question

Drew

English

18 May, 11:21

What do some critics see as a notable difference between the audio and text of Churchill's speech?

A. Churchill varies his speaking rate and volume to create emphasis in the audio version, but the sentence in the text version are lengthy and lack variety.

B. The tone in the text seems sad and defeatist, but in the audio version, Churchill speaks with determination

C. Churchill uses sarcasm in the audio version, but sarcasm cannot be identified in the text version

D. The tone in the text seems inspirational, but in the audio version, Churchill sounds unemotional

+3

Answers (2)

Know the Answer?

Nicholas Case · Answer 1

The correct answer (based on the actual choices) is C

Ean Haynes · Answer 2

D. The tone in the text seems inspirational, but in the audio version, Churchill sounds unemotional.

Explanation:

It is a beuatiful text, and if you read it you can see great words and beautiful writting, but once you hear it, Winston Churchill had a strange tone of voice and was too old at that time that he didn't actually adressed it the proper way, he has no tone, nor varies his speaking, it's just a flat speech. That's why there's a notable difference between the audio and the text of the speech.