Documenting Sources

The CSULB catalog defines plagiarism as “the act of using the ideas or work of another person or persons as if they were one’s own, without giving credit to the source” (54). Documenting more than you have to is always better than running the risk of engaging in plagiarism. As a rule, you must provide clear documentation and noting when you have used the ideas and/or words of someone else. You do not have to document what is factual or common knowledge. For instance, you do not need a source for the claim that Shakespeare lived from 1564 to 1616, and you do not need to cite someone who says that Katherina and Petruchio get married in Taming of the Shrew. Rules of plagiarism apply to all sources, including, of course, the Internet. To show your reliance on someone else’s ideas, you may quote or paraphrase, but in each case, the extent of your debt must be explict and clear. It should not be necessary for your reader to check up on the source.

Consider the following passage found on p. 115 of Coppélia Kahn’s book Man’s Estate: Masculine Identity in Shakespeare:

Kate steals the scene from her husband, who has held the stage throughout the play, and reveals that he has failed to tame her in the sense he set out to. He has gained her outward compliance in the form of a public display, while her spirit remains mischievously free. Though she pretends to speak earnestly on behalf of her own inferiority, she actually treats us to a pompous, wordy, holier-than-thou sermon that delicately mocks the sermons her husband has delivered to her and about her.

The following passages plagiarize from Kahn’s book:

1. Kate steals the scene from her husband, who has held the stage throughout the play, and reveals that he has failed to tame her in the sense he set out to. He has gained her outward compliance in the form of a public display, while her spirit remains mischievously free. Though she pretends to speak earnestly on behalf of her own inferiority, she actually treats us to a pompous, wordy, holier-than-thou sermon that delicately mocks the sermons her husband has delivered to her and about her. 

Clearly, this author has taken Kahn’s words without any form of attribution. This is the most obvious and best-known form of plariagism.

2. Kate steals the scene from her husband, who has held the stage throughout the play, and reveals that he has failed to tame her in the sense he set out to. He has gained her outward compliance in the form of a public display, while her spirit remains mischievously free. Though she pretends to speak earnestly on behalf of her own inferiority, she actually treats us to a pompous, wordy, holier-than-thou sermon that delicately mocks the sermons her husband has delivered to her and about her (Kahn, 115).

Although the author has put a citation in brackets at the end, he or she does not make clear what the extent of the debt to Kahn is and has not placed anything in quotation marks. Even though there is a vague reference, we can see that the words of Kahn are “stolen” in this piece of writing. Just putting the reference (or a footnote) in without showing what you have taken does not exonerate you from accusations of plagiarism.

3. It is clear in her final speech that Kate’s spirit remains mischievously free. She is merely acting as if she is sincere in her claim about her own inferiority. Pretending to be obedient, she refers to the husband as “thy lord, thy king, thy governor” (5.2.142) and tells us that “A woman moved is like a fountain troubled” (146) to show what happens to the reputation of a forward wife. But Kate has in fact found a more subtle way to dominate her husband in that she gives us a pompous sermon that mocks her husband’s speeches earlier in the play.

This author has taken only certain phrases from Kahn, adding some of his or her own writing. There is no clear attribution of the ideas and wording to Kahn and even if a bracketed reference followed, as in 2, there would be a question of plagiarism here because the author leaves the reader in the dark with regard to his or her reliance on the critic.

4. It is clear in her final speech that Kate maintains a free inner sense of self in spite of her seeming obedience. Kate’s argument for her own female weakness is an insincere, but very effective performance. She refers to the husband as “thy lord, thy king, thy governor” (5.2.142) and tells us that “A woman moved is like a fountain troubled” (146) to show what happens to the reputation of a forward wife. But Kate has in fact found a more subtle way to dominate her husband in that she gives us a self-important lecture that makes fun of and parodies her husband’s speeches earlier in the play.

Here too, although there are no literal borrowings from Kahn, the author has plagiarized: he or she is using Kahn’s ideas without giving her due credit. If passage 4 were followed by a bracketed reference or a footnote, it would nevertheless still classify as plagiarism because the author is unclear about the extent of the ideas he or she has taken from Kahn’s book.

To provide proper documentation, the passage should read something like this:

5. Coppélia Kahn has argued that Kate maintains a free inner sense of self in spite of her seeming obedience. In Man’s Estate, she shows that Kate’s argument for her own female weakness is an insincere, but very effective performance. This sheds new light on the speech: Kate refers to the husband as “thy lord, thy king, thy governor” (5.2.142) and tells us that “A woman moved is like a fountain troubled” (146) to show what happens to the reputation of a forward wife. But, as Kahn tells us, Kate has in fact found a more subtle way to dominate her husband in that she gives us a self-important lecture that makes fun of and parodies her husband’s speeches earlier in the play.

Here, each sentence that contains Kahn’s ideas begins with a phrase that shows it comes from her. The author uses Kahn’s ideas, but is unambiguous about his or her debt to Kahn. Note that there is one sentence without attribution—this is where the author is expanding on Kahn’s interpretation and offering some more detail.

In sum, to give proper credit, you must put quotation marks around the quoted phrases (“spirit remains mischievously free,” “her own inferiority,” “pompous,” “sermon,” and “mocks” in passage 3) but you must also be absolutely clear on the content that is taken from or inspired by Kahn in explicit terms. To be able to do so, you need to take conscientious notes as you are reading secondary materials (in books, articles, on the web, in another student’s paper, etc.). Make clear in your notes whether you are quoting or paraphrasing so that you don’t accidentally confuse the two in your paper.

Plagiarism, intentional or not, has serious consequences. In my classes, you will most likely receive an F for the course if I find out that you have plagiarized. If reported to the university’s committee on judicial affairs, you could be expelled from the school. Make sure you know what constitutes plagiarism and always ask if you are in any way unsure.

For some further reading, check out this handout by the Purdue University On-line Writing Lab.