Paraphrasing
to perfection
To understand
the difference between an acceptable and an unacceptable paraphrase, start
by reading this excerpt from an original source on the subject, a book
called The Craft of Research by Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb,
and Joseph M. Williams (Chicago: U of Chicago Press, 1995), p. 167.
Using the
three characteristics of an acceptable paraphrase identified earlier,
compare these two attempts at a paraphrase below to the original text.
The first is unacceptable, but the second one is quite acceptable. Can
you explain why?
Show Me
This paraphrase is unacceptable because its language is too close to the original, even though the source is identified.
Show Me
This paraphrase is acceptable, because the author has truly put the ideas in her own words, and cited the source.
Original
excerpt:
You
plagiarize when, intentionally or not, you use someone else's words
or ideas but fail to credit that person. You plagiarize even when
you do credit the author but use his exact words without so indicating
with quotation marks or block indentation. You also plagiarize when
you use words so close to those in your source, that if your work
were placed next to the source, it would be obvious that you could
not have written what you did without the source at your elbow.
(Booth, Colomb, and Williams 167)
Unacceptable
paraphrase:
It is plagiarism, intentional or not, to use someone else's ideas
or words without giving credit to that person. Even if you give credit
to the author, it is plagiarism to use his exact words without quotation
marks or block indentation. It is also plagiarism to use words so
close to the original that if someone put your work next to it, it
would be clear that you couldn't have written what you did unless
you had the original there with you. (Booth, Colomb, and Williams
167)
Acceptable
paraphrase:
Booth, Colomb, and Williams warn against three types of plagiarism:
1) using the "words or ideas" of a source without identifying it;
2) giving credit to a source but copying its language, in whole or
in part, without benefit of quotation marks; or 3) echoing the sentence
structure and phrasing of the original so closely that anyone can
see the writer was depending on it heavily as he wrote (167).
