To analyze the transformations involved with the triangles and their congruency, let's break down the descriptions given in the question.
-
Triangles ABC and A'B'C':
- The original triangle ABC has vertices at (-4, 5), (-1, 3), and (-3, 1).
- The second triangle A'B'C' has vertices at (4, 5), (1, 3), and (3, 1).
- If you compare the two sets of coordinates, you can see that A'B'C' is a reflection of ABC across the y-axis (flipping the x-coordinates from negative to positive) since the y-coordinates remain unchanged.
- Thus, triangle ABC is congruent to triangle A'B'C' because reflections preserve distances.
-
Triangles A'B'C' and A''B''C'':
- Triangle A''B''C'' has vertices at (1, 0), (-2, -2), and (0, -4).
- The second triangle appears to have been translated and/or rotated from the previous triangle. However, the specific transformations to reach from A'B'C' to A''B''C'' was not straightforward. The orientations seem different across these triangles.
-
Conclusion on congruency:
- For triangles to be congruent, they must have the same shape and size, and could be achieved through rigid transformations such as rotation, reflection, and translations, without changing their orientation.
- Since the triangles ABC and A''B''C'' do not have the same orientation, they cannot be congruent even if they are transformations of each other.
Now, reviewing the options provided:
- The transformation that describes ABC to A'B'C' is a reflection across the y-axis.
- For the transformation from A'B'C' to A''B''C'', while they may be transformations, their orientations differ, leading to the conclusion that they are not congruent.
Thus, the most fitting response is: Since triangles ABC and A''B''C'' do not have the same orientation, they are not congruent.