Want this question answered?
AnswerOriginally developed to communicate an identity to the illiterate, a logo is a blending of a product or company name with a distinctive typeface and/or artwork. So, to a great extent, "what is a good logo" is in the eye of the beholder.Certainly, some logos have the advantage of longevity. Logos for Coca-Cola, General Electric, and the Chevrolet "bow tie, " to name three, have been subtly refined over time, but still bear a strong resemblance to their original incarnations.Other companies change their logos every few years; the most often cited motivation is "to keep up with the times." Pepsi-Cola has had four separate logos since the mid 1980's. NBC has had a succession of logos in its history, while CBS still uses the "eye" introduced at the dawn of television.Without resorting to (copyrighted) pictures, it's easier to define what makes a logo bad than which ones are good. A bad logo may:Not match the personality of its product. Imagine what would happen if the word "Marlboro" were rendered in a feminine script.Be anonymous or characterless. Setting the brand name in Goudy Old Style (or whatever) is not a logo. It is a type treatment.Be hard to read. You can't communicate the name of your product if nobody can read it.Be changed too frequently. If you want to keep up with the times, fine, but be aware that it takes an immense amount of time and money to establish a logo in the public mind. If you don't have a huge advertising budget, don't change your logo.
Simple there would be no food and all of us would have to hunt and gather to eat.
It would increse the money supply.
people would not survive
We woun't have any money and then we would have thing for free also we would have no technology
Ethos - Apex
Maybe someone should listen in school and they would know.
You would be using ethos, pathos, and logos.
No. Pathos means emotional appeal, as opposed to logos (logic), or ethos (ethics). Saying something is not fair would be an example of pathos, while saying something is illegal or goes against tradition would be an example of ethos, and saying something makes no sense would be an example of logos. If someone is a bigot, then pathos probably wouldn't work. Much of what they are acting upon is pathos, and emotional arguments against them would be dismissed as sentimental. Besides, they would not care what is fair or how much their actions hurt others. Since their arguments are mostly emotional, logic would not work with them either. Ethics would be the best argument, but once again, if they are determined to be as they are, that wouldn't help much.
i love one direction who ever said i would nt except dat so careful what you say!!also i am a fan of 1Dxx
There is no plural form of ethos. It is a literary device, part of the rhetorical triangle. Pathos, an appeal to the emotions, logos, an appeal to logic, and ethos, an appeal to credibility and ethics. When composing a paper, you would use the term in the style of the following sentence:"The author's lack of first person in this piece supports his ethos, as his account is illustrated as non-biased."
I would say ethos, since the speaker is making the reference of what he would like to do, which makes it an appeal in the words of the narrator.
In Charles Foster Kane's speech, he uses rhetorical devices such as parallelism, repetition, and imagery to emphasize his message and capture the audience's attention. His speech also includes elements of pathos, logos, and ethos to persuade and connect with his audience emotionally, logically, and ethically.
evidence, facts, and statistics that support your analysis.
No, a paperclip weighs less than a gram (less than 3000 of 3 likograms)
As Ethos was the spirit of a culture, it is possible that the musical culture of the time much would have been written for or dedicated to Ethos. If there were any doctrine at all then it would have been conceived by man on behalf of Ethos.
Pathos ---> Apex