Citing the Source

Davey Do

Davey Do

Michel De Montique said something along the lines of, "I quote others only to better express myself", a concept to which I can identify. Great thinkers have put into words perspectives which are universally identifiable, and if we use their words, it is just that we give them credit.

However, using a great thinker or author's concept does not necessarily require a reference- it is the essence of truth which sometimes matters more than the source. It does sound more impressive to cite a source, and if that source is respected, the concept carries more weight.

For example, a nurse made comment that once a peer attained the position of a supervisor, their whole demeanor changed negatively- they seemed to be arrogant, drunk with power, and bossy. I replied to their perspective with, "Abraham Lincoln said, 'Nearly any individual can stand adversity. If you want to truly test one's character, give them power'".

That quote was paraphrased since I was speaking to a female about another female and Mr. Lincoln used the word of gender-specific "man and 'him", which would have not carried as much weight or identification with a woman. The paraphrasing was done so as to not delineate, and the person to who I spoke voiced their understanding and said, "I'm going to use that quote!"

Last night I penned a letter to an elderly gentleman from Chicago with who I had quite a long conversation with after the church service on Sunday. For nearly an hour, he gave his life's story, going hither and yond, to which I gave verbal feedback and guided him back to the initial topic, which was that he owned a small parking garage across the street from Wrigley Field. When the conversation ended and he needed to leave with his sister whom he was visiting, he said to me, "That was a good conversation. You're a good listener". In this letter, I wrote to this gentleman about my love of art, my talent being a gift from God, and that I enjoyed sharing it. I wrote, "It's as Jesus said, 'Don't hide your light under a bushel'".

I could have made the Biblical reference of "Matthew 5:15, but didn't because it would have messed up the flow of the prose. That's my take on it: Citing a reference can. ess up the flow of the prose in that more attention may be focused on the source than the concept.

While putting together a small comic like book for a historical presentation on Elijah P. Lovejoy last Fall, the manager of the historical library reviewed it and advised that I cite sources for any references, and I enquired as to why. "People may want to get more information from the source", she replied,

This may the reason for the ubiquitous use of book, chapter, and verse in quoting or just referencing Biblical verses and it tends to appear to be a little "showy", when the essence of the Biblical concept. is more important than citing the source.
 
Davey D0 said:
Michel De Montique said something along the lines of, "I quote others only to better express myself", a concept to which I can identify. Great thinkers have put into words perspectives which are universally identifiable, and if we use their words, it is just that we give them credit.

However, using a great thinker or author's concept does not necessarily require a reference- it is the essence of truth which sometimes matters more than the source. It does sound more impressive to cite a source, and if that source is respected, the concept carries more weight.

For example, a nurse made comment that once a peer attained the position of a supervisor, their whole demeanor changed negatively- they seemed to be arrogant, drunk with power, and bossy. I replied to their perspective with, "Abraham Lincoln said, 'Nearly any individual can stand adversity. If you want to truly test one's character, give them power'".

That quote was paraphrased since I was speaking to a female about another female and Mr. Lincoln used the word of gender-specific "man and 'him", which would have not carried as much weight or identification with a woman. The paraphrasing was done so as to not delineate, and the person to who I spoke voiced their understanding and said, "I'm going to use that quote!"

Last night I penned a letter to an elderly gentleman from Chicago with who I had quite a long conversation with after the church service on Sunday. For nearly an hour, he gave his life's story, going hither and yond, to which I gave verbal feedback and guided him back to the initial topic, which was that he owned a small parking garage across the street from Wrigley Field. When the conversation ended and he needed to leave with his sister whom he was visiting, he said to me, "That was a good conversation. You're a good listener". In this letter, I wrote to this gentleman about my love of art, my talent being a gift from God, and that I enjoyed sharing it. I wrote, "It's as Jesus said, 'Don't hide your light under a bushel'".

I could have made the Biblical reference of "Matthew 5:15, but didn't because it would have messed up the flow of the prose. That's my take on it: Citing a reference can. ess up the flow of the prose in that more attention may be focused on the source than the concept.

While putting together a small comic like book for a historical presentation on Elijah P. Lovejoy last Fall, the manager of the historical library reviewed it and advised that I cite sources for any references, and I enquired as to why. "People may want to get more information from the source", she replied,

This may the reason for the ubiquitous use of book, chapter, and verse in quoting or just referencing Biblical verses and it tends to appear to be a little "showy", when the essence of the Biblical concept. is more important than citing the source.
Click to expand...
Well, my friend.....the reason why we "should" quote sources is so that others reading what we post can understand that it was us who said it and not someone else.

If we do not do that then how does any know that you have done your research.

Then there is the thing about Plagiarism.

Then the reason why so many people post their Scriptures used is so that those reading can make sure that the comment made was not taken out of context and used a false teaching tool.
 
Plagiarism is an interesting perspective, referring to taking another's exact words, putting them out there, and saying it is our own. However, if we use the information contained in one's work and put it into our own words, that can be considered relaying information from research.

A concept, an idea, cannot be owned or copyrighted in and of itself, and therefore is not immoral or illegal to use in one's own work. The work which results from that ides or concept can be owned and copyrighted. As an artist, I've been told, "You can steal another's idea, but not their work".

Here's an example:





light bushel.jpg


​
The concept of not hiding one's light under a bushel is illustrated both realistically and metaphorically, in that Davey Do is taking the bushel off of the candle- the light- in one illustration and is sharing his art in the other, the light being his art. The caption is Hebrew for "let your light shine", or so I'm led to believe by a website.

None of the above is plagiarism, and no source cited, although the references are from two copyrighted sources.

The premise which I wish to put forth is, that if we take in information, institutionalize it, put it out there in our own words for others to consider, we do not necessarily need to cite the source.
 
Davey D0 said:
The premise which I wish to put forth is, that if we take in information, institutionalize it, put it out there in our own words for others to consider, we do not necessarily need to cite the source.
Click to expand...
I see what you're saying. From the OP, I thought this was about quoting references and such.
 
Davey D0 said:
Plagiarism is an interesting perspective, referring to taking another's exact words, putting them out there, and saying it is our own. However, if we use the information contained in one's work and put it into our own words, that can be considered relaying information from research.

A concept, an idea, cannot be owned or copyrighted in and of itself, and therefore is not immoral or illegal to use in one's own work. The work which results from that ides or concept can be owned and copyrighted. As an artist, I've been told, "You can steal another's idea, but not their work".

Here's an example:





The concept of not hiding one's light under a bushel is illustrated both realistically and metaphorically, in that Davey Do is taking the bushel off of the candle- the light- in one illustration and is sharing his art in the other, the light being his art. The caption is Hebrew for "let your light shine", or so I'm led to believe by a website.

None of the above is plagiarism, and no source cited, although the references are from two copyrighted sources.

The premise which I wish to put forth is, that if we take in information, institutionalize it, put it out there in our own words for others to consider, we do not necessarily need to cite the source.
Click to expand...
Plagiarism is not limited to verbatim material. Paraphrases and the unacknowledged use of ideas can fall under the banner of plagiarism.
 
Davey D0 said:
Plagiarism is an interesting perspective, referring to taking another's exact words, putting them out there, and saying it is our own. However, if we use the information contained in one's work and put it into our own words, that can be considered relaying information from research.

A concept, an idea, cannot be owned or copyrighted in and of itself, and therefore is not immoral or illegal to use in one's own work. The work which results from that ides or concept can be owned and copyrighted. As an artist, I've been told, "You can steal another's idea, but not their work".

Here's an example:





The concept of not hiding one's light under a bushel is illustrated both realistically and metaphorically, in that Davey Do is taking the bushel off of the candle- the light- in one illustration and is sharing his art in the other, the light being his art. The caption is Hebrew for "let your light shine", or so I'm led to believe by a website.

None of the above is plagiarism, and no source cited, although the references are from two copyrighted sources.

The premise which I wish to put forth is, that if we take in information, institutionalize it, put it out there in our own words for others to consider, we do not necessarily need to cite the source.
Click to expand...
You said......
"The premise which I wish to put forth is, that if we take in information, institutionalize it, put it out there in our own words for others to consider, we do not necessarily need to cite the source."

THAT I agree with and THAT is not Plagiarism.

THAT falls under the heading of reading, learning and assimilating then phrasing that information in your own words.
 
Davey D0 said:
Michel De Montique said something along the lines of, "I quote others only to better express myself", a concept to which I can identify. Great thinkers have put into words perspectives which are universally identifiable, and if we use their words, it is just that we give them credit.

However, using a great thinker or author's concept does not necessarily require a reference- it is the essence of truth which sometimes matters more than the source. It does sound more impressive to cite a source, and if that source is respected, the concept carries more weight.

For example, a nurse made comment that once a peer attained the position of a supervisor, their whole demeanor changed negatively- they seemed to be arrogant, drunk with power, and bossy. I replied to their perspective with, "Abraham Lincoln said, 'Nearly any individual can stand adversity. If you want to truly test one's character, give them power'".

That quote was paraphrased since I was speaking to a female about another female and Mr. Lincoln used the word of gender-specific "man and 'him", which would have not carried as much weight or identification with a woman. The paraphrasing was done so as to not delineate, and the person to who I spoke voiced their understanding and said, "I'm going to use that quote!"

Last night I penned a letter to an elderly gentleman from Chicago with who I had quite a long conversation with after the church service on Sunday. For nearly an hour, he gave his life's story, going hither and yond, to which I gave verbal feedback and guided him back to the initial topic, which was that he owned a small parking garage across the street from Wrigley Field. When the conversation ended and he needed to leave with his sister whom he was visiting, he said to me, "That was a good conversation. You're a good listener". In this letter, I wrote to this gentleman about my love of art, my talent being a gift from God, and that I enjoyed sharing it. I wrote, "It's as Jesus said, 'Don't hide your light under a bushel'".

I could have made the Biblical reference of "Matthew 5:15, but didn't because it would have messed up the flow of the prose. That's my take on it: Citing a reference can. ess up the flow of the prose in that more attention may be focused on the source than the concept.

While putting together a small comic like book for a historical presentation on Elijah P. Lovejoy last Fall, the manager of the historical library reviewed it and advised that I cite sources for any references, and I enquired as to why. "People may want to get more information from the source", she replied,

This may the reason for the ubiquitous use of book, chapter, and verse in quoting or just referencing Biblical verses and it tends to appear to be a little "showy", when the essence of the Biblical concept. is more important than citing the source.
Click to expand...

BibleLover said:
Plagiarism is not limited to verbatim material. Paraphrases and the unacknowledged use of ideas can fall under the banner of plagiarism.
Click to expand...

Happy New Year, Davey D0;

From reading your detailed thread, I get you. I'd like to share a common ground.

I serve pulpit supply 1 - 3 times a month, officiate funerals (sad but busy in 2024,) perform weddings and baby Christenings. My messages will include expounding on the theme, or "Citing the Source" with quotes, paraphrasing and giving credit to the author's information. A big No-No is never slant a Bible Scripture, isn't God the Author? Shudder the thought!

It cannot be helped that the mention of Plagiarism be raised from thoughts of discussing Citing the Source. In my own past studies / lectures, copying other's work and presenting them is lazy. If one cannot write from their own study and research, then refrain from writing using other's work. It's obvious the writer cannot form their own expression.

I am blessed to know a small handful of writers, poets, artists and love to give credit to their original work and praise God for their gift and ability. I also respect the work of an author who may not be as gifted, but the discernment and understanding (given to us by God) can be an encouraging and supportive spirit in their efforts.

God bless you, Davey D0, and thank you for sharing Citing the Source.

Bob
 
Thank you for the support, bobinfaith, and a Happy New Year to you!

In a high school literature class final, the instructor informed us that we could use notes and other resources to write an essay during class time. Somehow, I thought this was okay, yet I chose to write my essay without references because I wanted to convey what I had learned and not what I could reference and stated that in its opening. So, I allowed my thoughts to flow over the semester's readings and documented what I remembered and how it affected me. Needless to say, this tact impressed the instructor, I got a good grade out of the class, plus some recognition.

It is said, something along the lines of, "You don't have to know everything, just where to find it". In today's world of the internet, a multitude of information is literally at our fingertips. Yet, I have a drive to read, assimilate, and sometimes memorize works, such as quotes, poems, and, of course, some Bible verses. I carry those works with me and recall them as needed, all without the use of the ubiquitous iPhone!

To memorize, internalize, and institutionalize information within us allows it to become part of us and is like the rudder of a ship which guides through all waters, and steadies us in rough seas and I enjoy the process.

As you will note, I often quote sources by stating "along the lines of" in case it's paraphrased. I wish not to reference the exact quote by looking it up in available resources- that's is time consuming, cumbersome, and I fear loss of the expressive momentum. The essence of the concept I wish to convey is more important to me than being exactly correct.

This is a good discussion, and I would like to thank all for your input.
 
Davey D0 said:
This is a good discussion, and I would like to thank all for your input.
Click to expand...

I asked ChatGPT for its opinion on the matter...



Question: At what point does proprietary information become endemic enough to not warrant citation in writing? For example, if I pen an article and write, "Use the Force, Luke", it's likely all readers know the reference. Is a citation necessary in this case?

Answer: The need for citation depends on the context, purpose, and audience of your writing. Here's a breakdown:

Familiar Cultural References: If the reference is widely recognized and has entered common cultural knowledge (like "Use the Force, Luke" from Star Wars), a citation may not be strictly necessary in informal or creative writing. Readers are likely to understand the source without additional context.

Academic or Formal Writing: In academic or professional contexts, even well-known references might require citation to acknowledge the original work and maintain scholarly rigor. This is especially true if you're directly quoting the material.

Purpose of the Reference: If you're analyzing, critiquing, or building upon the source material, a citation is typically expected, regardless of the reference's popularity.

Legal Considerations: Even for well-known references, if your work involves commercial use, there could be copyright implications. While short phrases like "Use the Force" may not be copyrightable, using such references extensively or in a way that implies endorsement might require careful consideration.

Common Practice: In most informal writing, such as blog posts or opinion pieces, explicit citations for widely recognized references are uncommon unless they serve a specific purpose (e.g., guiding readers to the source material).

In your example, if the article is informal and meant for a general audience, a citation might not be necessary. However, if it's part of formal or academic discourse, a brief acknowledgment of Star Wars or George Lucas would be more appropriate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top