Original source material student version the selected memories, nevertheless, both from her childhood and from sally's do coalesce, or at least indicate a very clear thematic focus: primarily death, and, to a smaller extent, writing, creation, the power of words-two aspects where this book originates in: the trauma of death as a source of writing--and, as a result, as a means of creating one's self, the autobiographical subject, or the subject of this autobiography. references: séllei, n., (2009) the mother in mourning as the subject of autobiography in rosamond lehmann's the swan in the evening: fragments of an inner life. in a. o'reilly, & s. caporale-bizzini ( from the personal to the political: toward a new theory of maternal narrative (pp. 170-182). cranbury, nj: susquehanna university press. the distress caused by death can serve as a source for writing and writing can be seen as a way of creating one's self. it this way, death may be seen as the source of the autobiographical subject, which contrasts with our notions of an autobiography: the story of an individual's life. which of the following is true for the student version above? word-for-word plagiarism paraphrasing plagiarism this is not plagiarism

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.