Question

what is mainly the effect of the author mentioning the state of the union in the first line of the address? a. to emphasize the historic nature of the tragedy that occurred b. to make it clear that he just came up with these remarks on the spot c. to vent his frustration at the change of plans d. to tie in the challenger explosion with the rest of his planned remarks for the state of the union

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze each option:

• Option A: Mentioning the State of the Union (a formal, important address) in the context of a tragedy (like Challenger explosion) can emphasize the historic nature of the tragedy, as such a significant event being addressed in a major speech highlights its importance.
• Option B: There's no indication the remarks were made on the spot.
• Option C: Venting frustration isn't the main effect of mentioning the State of the Union.
• Option D: Tying to the rest of planned remarks is not the main effect; the focus is on the tragedy's significance, not just structuring remarks.

So the best answer is A as it aligns with emphasizing the historic nature of the tragedy.

Answer:

A. to emphasize the historic nature of the tragedy that occurred