First of all, I think it is inappropriate to say plagiarism in literary works. Many authors are influenced by their predecessors' works to some extent when they create their own works. The related works they have seen before will be deeply embedded in the author's mind. When creating his own works, subconsciously, he will use something he has seen before in his own works.
I don't think such a transformation can be regarded as plagiarism. Just like after reading such famous books as The Romance of the Three Kingdoms or A Dream of Red Mansions, or when there are touching truths in them, we often quote famous sayings in our compositions to explain these truths in our own words, which became the central idea of our articles later. If this is plagiarism, how many people's works have been plagiarized since ancient times? It's like painting.
In the early stage of study, we often copy the paintings of our predecessors. If this can also be said to be plagiarism, then every great painter will be branded as a plagiarist. In the field of literature, we can't use ordinary thinking to judge whether the author plagiarized. This kind of thinking shift can only be said to be literary re-creation, not plagiarism. There is not much red.
Like many popular works before. The magic road has also been exposed to plagiarism scandals, but is this really a fact? Can plagiarism in literary works really be distinguished from some words? I think the answer is no.
Looking at the works of predecessors, there must be some sentences or some truths that will resonate with you. These things will gradually penetrate into your heart. When you are creating, you will subconsciously use their subconscious actions, which come from your own accumulation of documents and cannot be said to be plagiarism.