Lecture: Integrating Sources: Quoting, Paraphrasing & Avoiding Plagiarism
Lecture script · about 15–20 minutes spoken · Week 10
Opening
Think of a nursing student charting what a patient said. Think of a reporter quoting a city council member. Think of a project manager passing a client's request to the team. Each of them has to decide when to use someone's exact words, when to restate them, and how to show whose idea it was. That decision is this lecture.
Here's where we are. In Week 2 you learned to summarize a text fairly, in your own words. In Week 6 you learned to quote a few exact words and spend your sentences on what they do. And last week, in Week 9, you chose the running draft's sources and tested each one. This week you bring those sources into your own sentences, honestly. Next week, in Week 11, you'll learn the citation rules behind what we practice here.
My main example is a short passage from a style manual that William Strunk Jr. privately printed in 1918. It's out of copyright, so I can read all of it to you. Let's start with three choices you already make every day.
1. The three honest moves
Picture a busy restaurant. A delivery driver calls with a long story about a flat tire and a lost box of lemons, and you have to pass it on to the manager. You can repeat the driver's exact words. You can say what he meant in your own words. Or you can boil the whole story down to one line. All three are honest, because each one tells the manager where the news came from.
Writing with sources uses the same three moves. A quotation is a source's exact words, copied from the real text and set in quotation marks, used when the precise wording matters. A paraphrase is a restatement of one specific passage in the writer's own words and own sentence structure, at about the original's length, credited to the source in the same way as a quotation. And a summary boils a longer passage, or a whole source, down to its gist. Together they're the three honest moves: the three ways a writer can bring a source into a draft while showing whose idea it is.
Here's the passage. It's Rule 13 of The Elements of Style, "Omit needless words", and it opens like this: "Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts."
A quotation keeps Strunk's words: Strunk opens Rule 13 with a four-word verdict, "Vigorous writing is concise." A paraphrase keeps his meaning in new words: Strunk argues that good prose keeps only the words that do work, comparing a padded sentence to a drawing with stray lines or a machine with spare parts. And a summary can cover a whole source. Here's one for a journal article: Beland and Murphy studied schools in four English cities that banned phones and found a small average gain in exam results, concentrated among the lowest-achieving students.
Pause and try this. That one sentence about Beland and Murphy covers their entire article. Is it a paraphrase or a summary?
Count how much of the source it covers.
Here's the answer. It's a summary. A paraphrase restates one passage at about its length, and this sentence shrinks a whole article to its gist.
2. Choose the move that fits the job
A carpenter doesn't reach for a hammer for every job, and you shouldn't reach for a quotation for every job either. Each move does something the others can't.
Quote when the exact wording matters: a memorable phrase, a definition, or words you plan to analyze. Paraphrase when the idea matters but the wording doesn't. Summarize when you need the gist of something long. So Strunk's four words, "Vigorous writing is concise.", are worth quoting, because they're short, memorable, and the very thing you'd discuss. The rest of his passage, about drawings and machines, is worth paraphrasing, because the comparison matters more than the wording. And the Beland and Murphy study is worth summarizing, because your essay needs its finding, not its data tables.
Here's a test I like. Imagine your reader asking, "Why did you quote that?" If your only answer is "it was in the source," paraphrase or summarize instead. A good quotation can always answer the question.
There's a trap here, and it's a common one. Some writers think a page full of quotations proves how much research they did. It doesn't. A page that's mostly other people's sentences hides your own thinking, and a reader starts to skim.
Pause and try this. You need the main idea of a long report in one sentence of your essay. Which move fits?
Think about how much of the report you need.
Here's the answer. A summary fits. You need the gist of something long, not its exact words or one passage restated at full length.
3. Lead in with a signal phrase
Think about a good host at a party. She doesn't push a stranger into the conversation. She says who the guest is and why they matter. A signal phrase does that for a source.
A signal phrase is the lead-in, usually placed right before a quotation or paraphrase, that names the source and sets up what comes next, such as "As Strunk argues". It tells your reader exactly where your voice stops and the source's voice begins.
The verb inside it matters too. A signal verb is the verb inside a signal phrase, such as argues, reports, finds, warns, or concedes, chosen to match what the source is actually doing. "Strunk argues" fits, because Rule 13 makes a case. "Beland and Murphy found" fits, because a study reports a result. Now listen to this one: "Beland and Murphy prove that phones hurt every student." That sentence misreports the source twice. "Prove" overstates a careful finding. And "every student" stretches a gain that was concentrated among the lowest-achieving students.
So the signal verb is a small claim about your source. Pick the verb that says what the source really does, no more and no less.
Pause and try this. A study measured a result. Which verb fits better in your signal phrase: "argues" or "found"?
Ask what a study does.
Here's the answer. "Found" fits better. A study reports a result it measured, and "argues" fits a writer making a case.
4. Credit ideas, not only words
Here's a short story. A classmate tells you her idea for fixing the long line at the coffee cart: a second register for drinks only. You love it. At the next student meeting, you pitch it in your own words. You never repeated her sentences, but most people would say you took something that was hers. The idea was hers.
Writing works the same way. Attribution means telling the reader where an idea or a set of words came from; it is owed for quoted words and for paraphrased or summarized ideas alike. And plagiarism is presenting another person's ideas, words, or work as your own, including restating someone's argument or distinctive language without credit. So a paraphrase and a summary need credit as much as a quotation does.
There's one exception. Common knowledge is a fact found in many sources, known to many readers, and not in dispute, which a writer may state without a citation. "King delivered 'I Have a Dream' in 1963" is common knowledge. It's in many sources, and no one argues about it. But "the gain was concentrated among the lowest-achieving students" is one study's finding, so it needs credit even in your own words. And when you're unsure, cite.
Pause and try this. You restate one study's finding entirely in your own words. Does it still need credit?
Think about whose idea it is.
Here's the answer. Yes, it needs credit. The words are yours, but the finding came from one study, so the idea still belongs to its authors.
5. Name the trap: patchwriting
Imagine borrowing a friend's essay, changing "big" to "large" all the way through, and handing it in with her name at the bottom. You typed every word. It's still her essay, because the skeleton is hers.
Rebecca Moore Howard named that move in 1992 and again in 1995. Patchwriting is keeping a source's sentence and swapping in synonyms or shuffling a clause; it is plagiarism even with a citation attached, because the sentence shape is still borrowed.
Listen to a patched version of Strunk. "Strong writing is brief. A sentence should have no unneeded words, a paragraph no unneeded sentences, for the same reason that a picture should have no unneeded lines and a machine no unneeded parts." Hear how close that is? It keeps both of Strunk's sentences, his order, and his comparison. "Vigorous" became "strong". "Concise" became "brief". "Unnecessary" became "unneeded", four times. Both versions run 34 words, and 8 single-word swaps leave 26 words sitting exactly where Strunk put them.
Here's the part that surprises people. Adding Strunk's name doesn't fix it. A citation credits the idea, not the borrowed sentence shape.
Pause and try this. A writer swaps 8 words in a 34-word passage and adds a citation. Paraphrase or patchwriting?
Think about the skeleton, not the citation.
Here's the answer. It's patchwriting. The 26 words left in place keep the source's skeleton, and a citation can't make a borrowed sentence shape your own.
6. Run the cover-the-source test
Think about giving a friend directions to your place. If you read them off a map app, you repeat its words. If you know the way, you say it your own way. Knowing the way frees you from the map's wording. Paraphrase works like that.
The cover-the-source test is a check on a paraphrase: read the passage until you understand it, cover it, write the idea from memory, then compare your sentence's skeleton against the original. If your sentence lines up with the original slot by slot, start again. And any phrase you kept word for word goes in quotation marks.
Run it on the patch, and it fails right away: every slot still lines up with Strunk's. Now run it on the paraphrase: "Strunk argues that good prose keeps only the words that do work, comparing a padded sentence to a drawing with stray lines or a machine with spare parts." It's one sentence instead of two. It opens with a signal phrase, not with Strunk's verdict. And it's about the same length, 28 words against 34. The meaning is Strunk's. The sentence belongs to the writer.
Pause and try this. When should you uncover the source: while you write, or after you finish your sentence?
Picture the cover still in place.
Here's the answer. After you finish. Glancing back while you write pulls the source's words and order into your sentence, and that's how most patchwriting happens.
7. Integrate the running draft's quotation
A quotation without a frame is like a guest who walks in and starts talking before anyone introduces them. The running draft fixes that with four parts. Here's its sentence: "As Beland and Murphy argue, 'the unstructured presence of phones has detrimental effects on certain students' (61), and the students they identify are the ones a college most needs to reach."
Let's walk through it. First, the signal phrase, "As Beland and Murphy argue". It names the authors. Second, the fragment, copied exactly from the article's abstract: "the unstructured presence of phones has detrimental effects on certain students". It's short, and the words "certain students" matter to the draft. Third, the page, 61, which is the first page of the article, where the abstract appears. Fourth, the writer's own analysis: "and the students they identify are the ones a college most needs to reach." That last part is the writer's thinking. Without it, the sentence only reports the source.
Why is the page alone in the parentheses? Because the authors are already named in the signal phrase. Without the signal phrase, the citation would carry both names and the page. Next week explains that rule in full.
Pause and try this. Which of the four parts is the writer's own thinking rather than the source's?
Find the clause that comes after the citation.
Here's the answer. The analysis is: "and the students they identify are the ones a college most needs to reach." It connects the source to the draft's claim.
8. A first look at synthesis
Picture two friends recommending a restaurant. One says it's always full. The other says the cook learned in her grandmother's kitchen. Put together, they tell you something neither says alone: it's busy because the food is good.
Synthesis is putting two or more sources in conversation around the writer's own point, so the reader sees how they agree, extend, or push against each other instead of meeting them as a list. Here's a list: "Amy writes about state laws. Beland and Murphy did a study." Each source sits alone. Now here's a conversation: "Amy reports that a majority of U.S. states now ban or regulate phones in schools, and Beland and Murphy's study suggests who such rules may help most: the lowest-achieving students." The first source shows what's happening. The second suggests why it might matter. The sentence says how they connect.
Pause and try this. What does the conversation version do that the list version doesn't?
Find the words that link the two sources.
Here's the answer. It connects the sources. The sentence says how the study relates to the news report, so the reader doesn't have to guess.
9. Check the machine: the quotation that does not exist
Chatbots are fast at producing quotations, and the quotations look perfect, with an author, a title, and a page. That polish is the problem. A fabricated quotation is words presented in quotation marks as a source's own that the real text does not contain, often supplied by a chatbot with an author, a title, and a page attached.
Here's how it goes. You ask a chatbot for a quotation from Strunk about concise writing, with a title and a page number. It hands back a polished sentence, credited to Strunk and his book, with a page attached. You open the Project Gutenberg text, search for the words, and they're not there. And there was a warning sign from the start: that text has no stable page numbers. So you drop the chatbot's sentence and quote Strunk's real words instead.
The tool drafts, and the writer judges. Formatting is not proof. The only proof that a quotation is real is finding its words in the real text.
Pause and try this. A chatbot's quotation arrives with an author, a title, and a page. What makes it safe to use?
Think about where the words have to live.
Here's the answer. Finding its exact words in the real source makes it safe. The author, title, and page prove nothing, because a chatbot can supply all three without opening anything.
Closing
Let me pull it together. The three honest moves are quotation, paraphrase, and summary, and each one shows whose idea it is. Let the job choose the move. Lead in with a signal phrase, and pick a verb that matches what the source does. Credit ideas, not only words, with common knowledge as the one exception. Patchwriting swaps words and keeps the skeleton, so a citation can't save it. Cover the source, write from memory, then check. Give every quotation a signal phrase, an exact fragment, a page, and your own analysis. Put sources in conversation. And never trust a quotation until you've found its words in the real text.
Next in this module come the slide deck, the Readings and Resources page, the lecture tutorial, the practice set, and the quiz. Next week, in Week 11, MLA Documentation, you'll learn the rules behind every citation you wrote here.
Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com