In a certain code language the word STUDENT is written as TUTDNES. Using the same rule, how will the word SOURCES be written in that code language?

Introduction / Context:
This question tests your observation of positional rearrangement in words. Instead of shifting letters in the alphabet, the code changes the order of letters following a particular pattern. You must decode this pattern from STUDENT → TUTDNES and then apply it to SOURCES.

Given Data / Assumptions:
STUDENT → TUTDNES.
We need to code SOURCES using the same rearrangement rule. We assume that the rule is based on positions (first, second, third etc.) and is applied consistently to any seven letter word.

Concept / Approach:
The method is to see, for each character in the coded word TUTDNES, from which position in STUDENT it came. That positional mapping can then be reused on SOURCES, which also has seven letters. Note that STUDENT has two T's, so we must carefully consider both possible position mappings that still give the same coded word.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Write STUDENT with positions: 1 S, 2 T, 3 U, 4 D, 5 E, 6 N, 7 T. The code is TUTDNES. Now track which original positions can produce this: one consistent mapping is code positions = original positions [7, 3, 2, 4, 6, 5, 1]. That gives: 7→T, 3→U, 2→T, 4→D, 6→N, 5→E, 1→S, which spells TUTDNES. So the general rule is: new order of letters = 7th, 3rd, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 5th, 1st letters of the original word. Now apply this to SOURCES, whose letters are: 1 S, 2 O, 3 U, 4 R, 5 C, 6 E, 7 S. Using the same order 7, 3, 2, 4, 6, 5, 1 we get: 7→S, 3→U, 2→O, 4→R, 6→E, 5→C, 1→S, which yields SUORECS.

Verification / Alternative check:
If we try any of the other options and map them back with the same positional rule, they do not recreate SOURCES. SUORECS is the only option consistent with the positions used in STUDENT → TUTDNES. That confirms our positional mapping is correct and properly applied.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
SOURCES is simply the original word and involves no rearrangement. SRUOCES and SOURSEC both represent different permutations that do not arise from the 7-3-2-4-6-5-1 positional rule. Therefore they cannot represent the same code pattern observed in the example.

Common Pitfalls:
A frequent mistake is to try to reverse the entire word or swap only the first and last letters. Such simple patterns do not fit the example exactly. Another pitfall is to ignore the significance of having seven letters and to misalign indices when applying the pattern to the new word.

Final Answer:
Using the same positional rearrangement, SOURCES is written in code as SUORECS.