The correct answer that should yield full score would be: compile code with all warnings enabled and you won't end up writing crappy code like this.
gcc test.c -std=c11 -pedantic-errors -Wall -Wextra
test.c: In function 'main':
test.c:6:3: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
int Multi[2][3][2] = {14,11,13,10,9,6,8,7,1,5,4,2};
^
However, I suspect that your teacher is not so much concerned about the code being crap, but is rather looking for the detail in the C language which allows arrays (and structures) to be initialized even though the brace list does not match the structure of what's being initialized.
As far as the C language is concerned, int Multi[2][3][2] = {14,11,13,10,9,6,8,7,1,5,4,2} is completely equivalent to:
// properly written initialization list for a 3D array
int Multi[2][3][2] =
{
{
{14, 11},
{13, 10},
{ 9, 6}
},
{
{ 8, 7},
{ 1, 5},
{ 4, 2}
}
};
The only rationale for why the first form is allowed, is because it allows you to write stuff like
int Multi[2][3][2] = {0};
which explicitly initializes the first element to 0 and the rest of the elements as if they had static storage duration (0 as well). Meaning all elements will be set to zero.
Writing things like int Multi[2][3][2] = {14,11,13,10,9,6,8,7,1,5,4,2} is abusing the C language. It is very bad practice. Doing so is banned by MISRA-C and so on.
A good teacher would be concerned about teaching you how to enable all compiler warnings and how to properly initialize multi-dimensional arrays, rather than letting you interpret obfuscated nonsense code.
warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]andwarning: (near initialization for 'Multi[0]') [-Wmissing-braces]