The Assyrian Empire vs, The Phoenician Empire Essay Example

The Assyrian Empire vs, The Phoenician Empire Essay Example The Assyrian Empire vs, The Phoenician Empire Paper The Assyrian Empire vs, The Phoenician Empire Paper The Assyrian Empire vs, The Phoenician Empire Within the Assyrian and the Phoenician Empires there was truly a contrast in their institutions, goals and values. While the Phoenicians conducted a society based on trade and religion, the Assyrians mainly focused on expansion and control. Moreover, both empires had their strengths and weakness within their respected societies. During this time period the Phoenician and Assyrian empires differed in Just about every aspect of society. While the Assyrians were an absolute ambitions empire that sought out territorial expansion and control of trade route and cities, the Phoenicians made no attempt to build a territorial empire and focused more on the creation of trade routes and ports. Also, the Assyrian empire tok much interest in huge labor forces for agricultural work and building projects, while the Phoenicians also put more work towards the innovation of ship building and seafaring, rather than building projects and agriculture. These two empires also had an absolute contrast when it came to their goals and values. Within the Assyrian empire, there were massive armies that were well trained and ruthlessly disciplined. This not only reveals how much the Assyrian relied on onquering land but it also shows how much they valued their military. On the contrary, the Phoenicians were more of a social empire that political, much like the mesopotamians; the Phoenicians saw religion as very important along with laws, science and writing. This goes on to show that the Phoenicians valued the human ming and spirit. In addition, the Assyrian empire created a cruel propaganda machine to support and Justify their system of expansion and inequality. Therefore showing how much the Assyrians truly valued their interest in expansion if they were illing to lie to their people to make it alright. In contrast, the Phoenicians saw no point in seeking to lie to their people to make it alright. In contrast the Phoenicians saw no point in seeking out new territories mostly because their coastal cities made them ideally situated to develop trade in the Mediterranean, which does to show that the sea and trade was a way of life for the Phoenicians. Also, the Assyrians has a rigid social structure that was not only made of mostly peasants but it also left women without any control of their own lives, which provides the thought that most people ithin the Assyrian empire were seen with no value at all. With that said, Phoenicians were more of a society based off religion and would even conduct sacrifices for their gods and at times children would also be sacrificed, which truly shows how much the Phoenicians valued their gods and religion. Moreover, the Assyrians and Phoenicians had completely opposite views of how to work a civilization. The Assyrians and Phoenicians definitely had different ways of conducting a made do with what they had. In Conclusion, These two Societies truly differed when it came to their institutions, goals and values.

The Difference Between Appositives and Descriptions

The Difference Between Appositives and Descriptions The Difference Between Appositives and Descriptions The Difference Between Appositives and Descriptions By Mark Nichol It is important for writers to distinguish between appositives and mere descriptions. A noun is said to be in apposition when it is set off from another noun that refers to the same idea. The phrase â€Å"set off† is significant, because a pair of commas separate the parenthetical apposition from its referent noun by a pair of commas. A description, however, needs no such bracketing. For example, take a look at this sentence: â€Å"Here’s what the CEO of Chrysler Sergio Marchionne said to his employees in a blog post.† â€Å"The CEO of Chrysler† and â€Å"Sergio Marchionne† are one and the same appositive so one or the other needs to be framed by commas. This can be accomplished in one of several ways: â€Å"Here’s what the CEO of Chrysler, Sergio Marchionne, said to his employees in a blog post.† â€Å"Here’s what Sergio Marchionne, (the) CEO of Chrysler, said to his employees in a blog post.† (The optional the is often omitted in journalistic contexts and retained in more formal writing.) â€Å"Here’s what Sergio Marchionne, Chrysler’s CEO, said to his employees in a blog post.† (This is a less formal variant of the previous two options.) A description, meanwhile, such as the job title in this case, is followed directly by the name without intervening punctuation, and no comma should follow the name, either: â€Å"Here’s what Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne said to his employees in a blog post.† The first sentence in each of the following pairs appeared in a printed or online publication with commas framing the name as if it was an appositive an error, and a distressingly common one. But notice below the differences between the statements labeled â€Å"Description† and the ones marked as â€Å"Apposition.† In a description, both the descriptive phrase and the name it applies to are essential; without either one, the sentence is incomplete. However, an apposition, being parenthetical, can be omitted without altering the integrity of the sentence. Description: â€Å"Ex-reservist and current war gamer Mike Brown admits his battle tactics may be a bit too aggressive for a real-life situation.† Apposition: â€Å"Mike Brown, an ex-reservist and current war gamer, admits his battle tactics may be a bit too aggressive for a real-life situation.† Description: â€Å"Kitchen queen Nigella Lawson comes to town, shops, chops, cooks, and raves about our produce.† Apposition: â€Å"Nigella Lawson, the kitchen queen, comes to town, shops, chops, cooks, and raves about our produce.† Description: â€Å"Conservative radio jock Michael Savage gets his own TV show.† Apposition: â€Å"A conservative radio jock, Michael Savage, gets his own TV show.† (The person’s name can come first, as in the previous examples, without a change in meaning, though the focus changes.) Description: â€Å"The San Francisco–based schooner C.A. Thayer begins a $9.6 million overhaul.† Apposition: â€Å"The C.A. Thayer, a San Francisco–based schooner, begins a $9.6 million overhaul.† (If the schooner has already been referenced generically, the sentence should read something like this: â€Å"The San Francisco–based schooner, the C.A. Thayer, begins a $9.6 million overhaul.†) Description: â€Å"The Emeryville studio Pixar hopes to cash in on its fish flick.† Apposition: â€Å"The Emeryville studio, Pixar, hopes to cash in on its fish flick.† (If two or more studios, each located in a different city, were previously mentioned, this sentence is correct. Otherwise, something like â€Å"Pixar, the Emeryville studio, hopes to cash in on its fish flick† would be appropriate.) Description: â€Å"Bryan Young is editor of the blog Big Shiny Robot.† Apposition: â€Å"Bryan Young is editor of the blog, Big Shiny Robot.† (The comma is necessary to indicate that the blog was already mentioned, but not by name. If not, the comma signals, fallaciously, that Big Shiny Robot is the only blog in existence.) Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Style category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:100 Idioms About NumbersCapitalization Rules for Names of Historical Periods and MovementsPrepositions to Die With